Authority: Supreme Court of India

Order Date: 30 September 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Appellant K.V. Seetharaman, President of Kulithalai Naidu Mahajan Sangam; Respondents Assistant Commissioner H.R. and C.E. Admin Dept. & Others.
  • The appellant filed a suit in 1988 seeking declaration of right to manage and administer the affairs of Sri Venugopalswamy Bajanaimadam and a consequential injunction. The Trial Court decreed in favour on 18‑09‑1995.
  • The High Court, by order dated 16‑12‑2009, reversed the trial court, holding the suit not maintainable because a declaration under Section 63(a) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 was not obtained.
  • The present appeal (Civil Appeal No(s). 11297/2016) questioned whether the High Court’s judgment was proper.
  • Senior counsel for the appellant: Mr. V. Prabhakar, Sr. Adv.; Mr. R. Chandrachud, AOR; Ms. Jyoti Parashar, Adv.; Mr. Aryan Singh, Adv. Senior counsel for the respondents: Mr. M. Sathayanarayanan, Sr. Adv.; Mr. B. Karunakaran‑3845, AOR; Mr. Shoaib Fazil, Adv.
  • Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.M. Sundresh and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prasanna B. Varale.

Final Outcome

  • The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s conclusion that the suit is not maintainable.
  • The Court directed that the appellant has six weeks from receipt of the order to file a fresh application under Section 63(a) of the Act before the Joint/Deputy Commissioner.
  • The authority must dispose of the application within three months of filing; the status‑quo as of today shall be maintained pending the decision.
  • The Court clarified that the competent authority must decide the application on its own merits, independent of the High Court’s findings.
  • The appeal is disposed of in the terms of the signed order; any pending applications shall also stand disposed of.
  • The order was signed by Justices M.M. Sundresh and Prasanna B. Varale, dated 30‑09‑2026, and entered into the record by Assistant Registrar Sweta Balodi and Poonam Vaid, with a correction noted in the cause‑title.

Topics: Judicial Decision, Religious Endowments