Specific Endowment Defined: Supreme Court rules on Religious Charity in Idol of Sri Renganathaswamy vs. P K Thoppulan Chettiar (2020)

Introduction

Date of the Judgment: February 19, 2020

Citation: 2020 INSC 170

Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and Ajay Rastogi, J

Can a private trust, created for charitable purposes connected to a temple, be considered a ‘specific endowment’ under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, thus restricting its ability to sell the property without the Commissioner’s approval? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a recent case involving a trust seeking to sell land originally designated for charity. The core issue revolved around interpreting a Deed of Settlement and determining whether it created a specific endowment for a religious charity. The judgment was delivered by a two-judge bench comprising Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and Ajay Rastogi, J, with the opinion authored by Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J.

Case Background

In 1887, Thoppulan Chettiar purchased a property. He constructed a ‘Stone Mandapam’ on a portion of this land for the deity of Sri Renganathaswamy. During Hindu festivals, he would invite the deity and conduct charitable activities, such as providing water and millet porridge to devotees. In 1901, Thoppulan Chettiar executed a Deed of Settlement, prohibiting the sale or mortgage of the property and directing his descendants to continue these charitable activities using their business income. In 1978, the property was leased out, and parts of it were encroached upon. Due to difficulties in maintaining the property, the trust managing it decided to sell a portion of the land, excluding the area where the ‘Stone Mandapam’ was located. The objective was to use the interest from the sale proceeds to continue the charitable activities. In 2001, an agreement was made to sell 20,865 square feet of the property to the fourth respondent.

Timeline

Course of Proceedings

In 2004, the first respondent (the trust) filed a suit before the Second Additional Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirapalli, seeking permission to sell the property. The appellant (the idol of Sri Renganathaswamy) opposed the sale, arguing that the property was dedicated to the idol for charitable activities and that the trust had no right to alienate it. The trial court ruled in favor of the trust, stating that the trust was private and not subject to the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. The Principal District Judge, Tiruchirapalli, upheld this decision in 2005. The Madras High Court dismissed the second appeal in 2016, stating that the Deed of Settlement did not create any charge or encumbrance in favor of the appellant and that the trust was private, allowing the civil court to permit the sale.

Legal Framework

The core legal issue revolves around the interpretation of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, specifically Section 6(19), which defines a “specific endowment” as:


“any property or money endowed for the performance of any specific service or charity in a math or temple or for the performance of any other religious charity, but does not include an inam of the nature described in Explanation (1) to clause (17);”

The Act also defines “religious charity” in Section 6(16) as:


“a public charity associated with a Hindu festival or observance of a religious character, whether it be connected with a math or temple or not;”

Section 34 of the Act of 1959 states that any sale of property belonging to a religious institution requires the sanction of the Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments. Section 108 of the Act of 1959 bars civil courts from hearing matters for which provision is made in the Act.

The Supreme Court also considered Section 10 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, which deals with conditions restraining alienation, and Section 1 of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882, which exempts both public and private charitable endowments.

Arguments

Appellant’s Arguments:

• The Deed of Settlement indicates that the property was purchased for charitable work related to the Sri Renganathaswamy sanctum, thus losing its secular character.
• The distribution of water and millet porridge during festivals at the black stone hall establishes a religious charitable endowment linked to the temple.
• The charity was to be funded by the income from the property, with excess income reserved for a family fund.
• The trustees were explicitly prohibited from selling or mortgaging the property.
• The suit is not maintainable as Section 34 of the Act of 1959 empowers the Commissioner, not the civil court, to sanction the sale of the property.
• Section 108 of the Act of 1959 bars a civil suit from being instituted in respect of matters covered by the provisions of the Act of 1959.

Respondents’ Arguments:

• The Act of 1959 does not apply to the trust without a government notification of mismanagement.
• The trust is secular, not confined to Hindus, and established for the public without religious distinctions.
• The Deed of Settlement does not create a specific endowment for the deity, and the charity is performed at the property, not within the temple.
• The trust is managed by the founder’s descendants, with no public involvement or HR&CE Department appointees.
• The civil court has jurisdiction over the suit, and the Indian Trusts Act, 1882, does not apply to the trust.
• The restraint on sale in the Deed of Settlement is void under Section 10 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and the sale should be allowed under the doctrine of cypres.
• The temple admitted it never controlled the trust, and there was no dedication of the property to the temple.

The innovativeness of the argument made by the appellant was that they argued that the property was dedicated for the purpose of the charity and had lost its secular character, and the innovativeness of the argument made by the respondent was that the restraint created in the Deed of Settlement is void as per Section 10 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court framed the following issue for consideration:

✓ Whether the Deed of Settlement dated 8 July 1901 creates a specific endowment regulated by the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

The following table demonstrates as to how the Court decided the issues

Authorities

The Supreme Court considered the following authorities:

Cases:

• Menakuru Dasaratharami Reddi v Duddukuru Subba Rao [AIR 1957 SC 797] – The Supreme Court explained the difference between complete and partial dedication of property for religious purposes. It stated that a complete dedication creates a public trust, whereas a partial dedication creates a charge on the property.
• Mahant Ram Saroop Dasji v S P Sahi [1959 Supp (2) SCR 583] – The Supreme Court distinguished between public and private religious endowments, stating that public trusts benefit an uncertain and fluctuating body of persons, while private trusts benefit definite individuals.
• Commr, Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments v Narayana Ayyangar [AIR 1965 SC 1916] – The Supreme Court interpreted “associated with” in the context of a religious charity, stating that it means “being connected with” or “in relation to” a Hindu festival or observance.
• K S Soundararajan v Commr of Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments [(2016) 15 SCC 597] – The Supreme Court held that offering food during a religious festival constitutes a religious charity.
• M J Thulasiraman v Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Admn [(2019) 8 SCC 689] – The Supreme Court held that an inscription providing for the feeding of Brahmins during religious festivals constitutes a specific endowment.

Legal Provisions:

• Section 6(19) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 – Defines “specific endowment.”
• Section 6(16) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 – Defines “religious charity.”
• Section 34 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 – Requires the Commissioner’s sanction for the sale of religious institution property.
• Section 108 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 – Bars civil courts from hearing matters for which provision is made in the Act.
• Section 10 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Deals with conditions restraining alienation.
• Section 1 of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882 – Exempts public and private charitable endowments.

Judgment

The Supreme Court held that the Deed of Settlement created a “specific endowment” for a religious charity, thus the sale of the property requires the approval of the Commissioner under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.

How each authority was viewed by the Court:

• Menakuru Dasaratharami Reddi v Duddukuru Subba Rao [AIR 1957 SC 797]*: The Court relied on this case to explain the distinction between complete and partial dedication, emphasizing that the intention of the settlor must be determined by considering the document as a whole.
• Mahant Ram Saroop Dasji v S P Sahi [1959 Supp (2) SCR 583]*: The Court used this case to distinguish between public and private charities, noting that public charities benefit a fluctuating body of persons.
• Commr, Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments v Narayana Ayyangar [AIR 1965 SC 1916]*: The Court relied on this case to define “associated with” in the context of religious charity, stating that it means “being connected with” or “in relation to” a Hindu festival.
• K S Soundararajan v Commr of Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments [(2016) 15 SCC 597]*: The Court used this case to support the view that offering food during a religious festival is a religious charity.
• M J Thulasiraman v Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Admn [(2019) 8 SCC 689]*: The Court relied on this recent decision to show that a specific endowment is created when money or property is endowed for the performance of a religious charity.

What Weighed in the Mind of the Court?

The Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the interpretation of the Deed of Settlement and the definitions provided in the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. The Court emphasized that the Deed of Settlement created an absolute prohibition on the sale or mortgage of the property, indicating a clear intention to dedicate the property for charitable purposes. The Court also focused on the fact that the charity was for the benefit of the “devotees” during specific Hindu festivals, which established a public religious charity.

Logical Reasoning:

The Court considered alternative interpretations, such as the argument that the trust was secular and not subject to the Act of 1959. However, it rejected this argument based on the specific language of the Deed of Settlement and the definitions in the Act. The Court also rejected the argument that the restraint on sale was void under Section 10 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, focusing instead on the applicability of the Act of 1959.

The decision was reached by concluding that the Deed of Settlement created a specific endowment for a religious charity, which is governed by the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. The Court emphasized that the charity was for the benefit of the “devotees” during specific Hindu festivals, which established a public religious charity. This finding meant that the trust could not sell the property without the Commissioner’s approval.

The Court stated, “The Deed of Settlement provides that, ‘The settler purchased the punja land mentioned in the schedule of property… for the performance of charity work in reference to Sri Renganathanswamy sanctum’. The property outlined in the schedule of the Deed of Settlement is described as, ‘Property allotted for charity work’.”

The Court further stated, “The activities of the first respondent trust have a connection with Chithirai Gajendra Moksham and Padi Eighteen festivals and the charity is to be carried on for the benefit of the “devotees” of Sri Renganathaswamy sanctum .”

The Court also noted, “Applying the reasoning set out in M J Thulasiraman to the facts of the present case , where money (or property) is endowed for the performance of a religious charity, a “specific endowment” as defined in Section 6(19) is created.”

Key Takeaways

• A Deed of Settlement that dedicates property for charitable activities related to a religious festival can create a “specific endowment” under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.
• Such an endowment restricts the ability of the trust to sell the property without the approval of the Commissioner.
• The definition of “religious charity” includes public charities associated with Hindu festivals, even if not directly linked to a specific temple.
• The intention of the settlor, as expressed in the Deed of Settlement, is crucial in determining whether a specific endowment has been created.

Directions

The Supreme Court set aside the order of the High Court and dismissed the suit filed by the first respondent. However, the first respondent was given the liberty to adopt the prescribed procedure under the Act of 1959.

Specific Amendments Analysis

There were no specific amendments discussed in the judgment.