K.Palanichamy vs The Superintendent Of Police
2022 Latest Caselaw 15298 Mad

                                                                              W.P.(MD).No.26814 of 2019


                              BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                   DATED : 14.09.2022

                                                       CORAM :

                             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

                                              W.P.(MD).No.26814 of 2019


                     K.Palanichamy                                            ... Petitioner

                                                          Vs.

                     1.The Superintendent of Police,
                       Karur,
                       Karur District.

                     2.The Inspector of Police,
                       Vellianai Police Station,
                       Karur Taluk,
                       Karur District.

                     3.Vaiyapuri Goundar

                     4.Subramanian                                            ... Respondents


                     Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
                     issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to return the keys for
                     the petitioner's temple Sri Sadachimman, Sri Muthallam, Sri Karuppanasamy
                     Temple situated at Vennilai, Uppidamangalam Village, Karur Taluk which
                     was forcefully obtained from the petitioner on 06.06.2019 and consequently,
                     forbear the respondents from interfering with the affairs of the said temple
                     and abide by the decree in O.S.No.253 of 1989 before the District Munsif


                     1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                       W.P.(MD).No.26814 of 2019


                     Court, Karur dated 17.12.1990.
                                        For Petitioner            : Mr.P.Samuel Gunasingh
                                        For R1 & R3               : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar
                                                                   Additional Public Prosecutor
                                        For R3&R4                 : Mr.K.P.Palanivel Rajan

                                                               ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of

Mandamus directing the second respondent police to handover the keys of the

Temple to the petitioner and to forbear the respondents from interfering with

the affairs of the Temple.

2.The case of the petitioner is that his father was the hereditary trustee

of Sri Sadachimman, Sri Muthallam and Sri Karuppanasamy Temple. There

was interference in conducting the affairs of the Temple by the third

respondent and three others and hence, the father of the petitioner filed a suit

in O.S.No.253 of 1989 before the District Munsif Court, Karur, seeking for

the relief of permanent injunction. The Trial Court, on considering the facts

and circumstances of the case and on appreciation of evidence, came to the

conclusion that the affairs of the Temple is being managed by the father of the

petitioner as the hereditary trustee and accordingly, the suit was decreed as

prayed for.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.26814 of 2019

3.The decree passed by the Trial Court was subsequently confirmed in

A.S.No.83 of 1991 by the Sub-Court, Karur, through judgment and decree

dated 09.02.1995. Thus, the decree of the Civil Court became final. During

the pendency of the appeal, the father of the petitioner died and hence, the

petitioner and other legal heirs were impleaded as parties.

4.The further case of the petitioner is that after the demise of his father,

he was managing the affairs of the above said Temple. The grievance of the

petitioner is that based on the complaint given by the third and fourth

respondents, the second respondent called the petitioner for an enquiry and he

was made to handover the keys of the Temple. Aggrieved by the same, the

present writ petition has been filed seeking for the aforesaid relief.

5.Heard P.Samuel Gunasingh, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner, Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.K.P.Palanivel Rajan, learned

counsel appearing for the third and fourth respondents.

6.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the third and fourth

respondents submitted that during the pendency of the writ petition, the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.26814 of 2019

petitioner was removed from the post of Trustee on the ground of

misappropriation of funds and the keys were handed over by the petitioner to

the Committee and the petitioner has nothing to do with the affairs of the

Temple. The learned counsel appearing for the third and fourth respondents

also brought to the notice of this Court the suit filed in O.S.No.70 of 2021 on

the file of the District Munsif Court, Karur, by the present trustee of the

Temple. In view of the same, the learned counsel submitted that the relief as

sought for in this writ petition is unsustainable.

7.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted

that the keys were handed over to the police and in turn, it was handed over

to the third respondent. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor also relied

upon the written instructions received from the respondent police and

submitted that a representation has been made to the HR&CE Department to

take over the Temple and the issue is pending at that stage.

8.In the considered view of this Court, there is no requirement for this

Court to go into the present dispute that is pending in O.S.No.17 of 2021.

From the available records, it is seen that a decree was passed by the

competent Civil Court in favour of the father of the petitioner. Even assuming

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.26814 of 2019

that there is a dispute among the trustees, that doesnt mean that the

respondent police can get into the issue and interfere with the affairs of the

Temple. The second respondent receiving the Keys of the Temple from the

petitioner was clearly misuse of power and the second respondent has no

business to interfere with the dispute between the trustees of the Temple. The

second respondent by getting back the keys from the petitioner has virtually

gone against the decree passed by the Civil Court. In view of the same, this

Court has to necessarily restrain the police from interfering with the dispute

in future.

9.Insofar as the dispute as among the trustees of the Temple, this Court

need not get into that issue and what is available before the Court is a decree

which was passed earlier in favour of the father of the petitioner. In any

event, this Court cannot adjudicate the private dispute in a writ petition and

hence, this Court is laying off its hand from that dispute.

10.In view of the above discussion, this Writ Petition is disposed of

with a direction to the respondent police not to interfere with the affairs of the

Temple in future and it is left open to the petitioner to workout his remedy in

accordance with the Civil Court decree that was already passed in favour of

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.26814 of 2019

his father. No costs.

14.09.2022 Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Ns

To

1.The Superintendent of Police, Karur, Karur District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Vellianai Police Station, Karur Taluk, Karur District.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.26814 of 2019

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

Ns

Order made in W.P.(MD).No.26814 of 2019

Dated:

14.09.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis