Madras High Court rejects trustee’s ‘movie-like’ abduction claim over Rs 800 crore Madurai religious land, orders…

Religious: Calling a trustee’s explanation a “movie-like defence” that he had been abducted by unidentified persons, taken to the sub-registrar’s office at knifepoint and forced to execute a power of attorney that was later used in transactions involving religious endowment properties, the Madras High Court has ordered scrutiny of rival claimants, recovery of valuable trust lands and protection of assets reportedly worth around Rs 800 crore.

Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing a batch of writ petitions and a contempt petition relating to the administration of Nacharammal Kattalai, a religious endowment associated with the Arulmigu Koodalazhagar Temple in Madurai.

“The movie-like defence of the petitioner cannot even be convincingly spoken by him, let alone being believed by anybody else,” the court said on June 1, dismissing a challenge to the removal of a hereditary trustee accused of facilitating the sale of religious endowed properties.

The Madras High Court said that the records showed that a power of attorney had been executed, and the religious endowed properties were subsequently sold. (File Image, enhanced using AI)

Court criticises ‘movie-like’ defence

Cracking down on a succession battle over a Madurai religious endowment, the court said those involved in alienation or misappropriation of endowment properties cannot be allowed to hold positions of trust.

The court was particularly critical of former hereditary trustee M Thiruppathi’s “movie-like” explanation that he had been abducted by unidentified persons, taken to the sub-registrar’s office at knifepoint, and forced to execute a power of attorney that was later used in transactions involving endowment properties.

Rejecting the claim as wholly unbelievable, the court said the judge noted that, despite alleging abduction and coercion, the petitioner had not taken action against the alleged abductors.

However, records showed that a power of attorney had been executed, and the endowed properties were subsequently sold through a power agent.

Story continues below this ad

The litigation involved competing claims to hereditary trusteeship, challenges to Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) proceedings, and disputes over the management of endowed properties.

Century-old endowment at centre of family feud

The dispute centres on Nacharammal Kattalai, a religious endowment established through a registered deed in 1923 for maintaining a Mandagapadi Mandapam and conducting rituals connected with Lord Kallazhagar’s annual Chithirai festival visit to Vandiyoor in Madurai.

The endowment also involved the maintenance of properties dedicated to religious purposes.

A scheme framed in 1955 and modified in 1967 provided for administration through hereditary trustees representing three family branches, the Senior Muthusamy Pillai branch, the Junior Muthusamy Pillai branch, and the Sundararaja Pillai branch, along with two non-hereditary trustees.

Story continues below this ad

Over the decades, rival family members have repeatedly approached courts and the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) authorities over succession and control of the trust.

The latest round of litigation arose after HR&CE authorities initiated steps to appoint trustees, and several claimants challenged the process while asserting competing hereditary rights.

Court upholds removal of hereditary trustee

One of the principal petitions was filed by M Thiruppathi, who had earlier been recognised as hereditary trustee representing the Junior Muthusamy Pillai branch.

Authorities had charged him with involvement in transactions through which endowed properties were allegedly sold to third parties.

Thiruppathi argued that he had been abducted and forced to execute a power of attorney that facilitated the transactions.

He also relied on the fact that he had been discharged from a related criminal case.

The court, however, was not persuaded.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy observed that while criminal proceedings require proof beyond a reasonable doubt, departmental proceedings are governed by the standard of preponderance of probabilities.

The court found that the trustee, through a power agent, had participated in transactions that resulted in the sale of endowed property and held that the charges stood proved.

“Trusteeship of an endowment is an office to be discharged by persons of the highest integrity and devotion towards the purpose,” the judge said, adding that attempts to dismantle an endowment through the sale of its assets constituted an extremely serious breach of duty.

The court dismissed the writ petition and imposed costs of Rs 25,000 payable to the Arulmigu Koodalazhagar Temple.

Assets said to be worth Rs 800 crore

A major concern highlighted during the proceedings was the present state of the  religious endowment properties.

The court recorded submissions that the properties attached to the Kattalai could be worth around Rs 800 crore.

It noted that revenue records for several properties stood in the names of individuals rather than the endowment itself, raising concerns about the protection of trust assets.

Describing restoration of the endowment’s ownership records as a priority, the court directed authorities to take steps to mutate revenue records in favour of Nacharammal Kattalai.

The judge also rejected suggestions that some lands could be sold because they lacked irrigation facilities.

“Merely because some of the lands are dry lands and do not have irrigation facilities cannot be grounds to sell or otherwise dispose of the property.

Lands are now valuable, and the same is increasing day by day,” the court said.

Transparent process ordered for appointment of trustees

While considering challenges to an HR&CE notification inviting applications for trusteeship, the court acknowledged that hereditary trusteeship ordinarily devolves according to succession and is not a matter of fresh appointment.

However, given the multiple rival claims, allegations of irregularities, and disputes over family lineage, the court held that a detailed enquiry was necessary.

Story continues below this ad

The joint commissioner of the HR&CE department, Madurai, has been directed to consider all pending applications and claims in accordance with the law.

Every claimant must file a notarised affidavit acknowledging that the identified properties belong to the endowment, agreeing to the correction of revenue records, and disclosing details of any criminal proceedings.

Authorities have also been directed to scrutinise applicants for disqualifications under the HR&CE Act.

Significantly, the court directed that any claimant found to have dealt with or been involved in the misappropriation of endowed properties should have their application rejected.

Encroachments must be removed

The court also issued a series of directions aimed at restoring the religious endowment‘s financial and administrative health.

Story continues below this ad

Once trustees are appointed, they must identify encroachments and bring them to the notice of HR&CE authorities.

The assistant commissioner has been directed to initiate proceedings for the eviction of unauthorised occupants and recovery of properties wherever necessary.

The court further ordered the preparation of a complete digital inventory of religious endowment properties and directed that lands be leased in a transparent manner to maximise income for the institution.

Authorities were also asked to recover rent arrears from defaulting tenants and ensure proper administration of movable assets, including bank accounts.

Story continues below this ad

Contempt petition closed

The court also disposed of a contempt petition alleging non-compliance with an earlier order concerning the trust‘s administration.

Holding that the circumstances did not disclose wilful disobedience, Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy declined to proceed further.

However, the court clarified that parties would be free to seek contempt action in the future if the fresh directions issued in the judgment were not implemented.

Three month deadline for action

To bring an end to the prolonged dispute, the court directed the joint commissioner to complete the process of considering applications and appointing eligible hereditary trustees from the three family branches within three months.

Story continues below this ad

The judgment is expected to have implications beyond the Nacharammal Kattalai dispute, reinforcing judicial concern over the protection of religious endowment properties and underscoring that those entrusted with managing such institutions must meet the highest standards of integrity and accountability.