VISVANATHA PANDARA SANNADHI ALIAS SUNDARA PANDARA SANNADHI; SOUTHINDIA BANK, LTD TINNEVELLY, THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED AGENT S SUBBAIYAVIER Vs. SOUTH INDIA BANK, LTD, TINNEVELLY, THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED AGENT SSUBBAIYAVIER; VISVANATHA PANDARA SANNADHI ALIAS S

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff obtained a decree against one Nataraja Aiyar in Original Suit No 30 of 1908 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Tinnevelly. Certain debts due to Nataraja Aiyar were attached and brought to sale. Plaintiff became the purchaser. One of the debts thus purchased was due on a bond executed by the 1st defendant. He was at the time of the bond (16th June 1904) the Srishta Adhinakarta of the Devastanam. In order to understand the position of the 1st defendant, it is necessary td state that a large number of families in Jaffna are the hereditary trustees of the Devastanam. They appoint one among themselves as the principal manager or "the Srishta Adhinakarta". Transactions connected with the temple are entered into by him. There can be no question that he acts as the representative of all the trustees and represents the temple as well.

(2.) To go back to the claim in the suit, the suit was instituted in June 1910. A number of defences were raised. It was pleaded that the 1st defendant was not personally liable, that the debt was not properly identified and that the claim was barred by limitation.

(3.) The Subordinate Judge held that the suit was in time, but that the 1st defendant was personally liable and not the Devastanam. Both the plaintiff and the 1st defendant preferred separate appeals. Both of them wanted that the liability should be laid on the trust.