Appeal No 1000 of 1965
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated December 13 1962 of the Bombay High Court in Appeal No 688 of 1959 from original Decree
CK Daphtary Attorney General MSK Sastri and SP Nayar for the appellant
HR Gokhale YS Chitale and K Rajendra Chaudhuri for the respondent
661 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Sikri J
This appeal by certificate granted by theHigh Court of Judicature at  Bombay is directed  against its judgment and decree dated December 30 1962 whereby it seaside the order made by the Assistant Charity Commissioner dated
August 19 1955 as confirmed by the Deputy Charity Commissioner and by the District Judge Nasik
The High Court held that the Nasik Math is not liable to be registered under the BOmbay Public Trusts Act 1950  The High Court found the following facts relating to the Nasik Math The principal Math is situated in the State of Mysore and as His Holiness is a Sanyasi he generally names the house properties
with temples as Maths 
The properties at Nasik Panchavati are known as properties of Shringeri Math
The Samadhis have been constructed to look like  temple there is Sabha Mandap in which an image of Adya Shankaracharya is installed
All the expenses have been incurred by His Holiness from the income of the Shringeri Math and some money was borrowed from
Nasik creditors
Here religious instructions are not imparted and no spiritual service is rendered to any body of disciples
Some times people come there and if they are given admission they stay there for a short time
There being Samadhis in these premises there are some idols and occasional festivals but it is not a temple for purpose of public worship
No member of the public is allowed to enter the place of worship but it is  carried out by the Pujaris according to Vedic usage
This property is being maintained by the Principal Math from the very beginning
The income consists
1  rent earned by letting the property 2 offerings made before the Samadhis 3 grant from Nasik Treasury of Rs  289 per year and
 4  yearly grant of Rs 460 10 from village Pimpalgaon Funji in Ahmednagar District
 The High Court further observed One of the Sanads regarding the income of Pimpalgaon village is on record  and it shows that the grant of the income of the village is made to Shri Shankaracharya clearly mentioning it to be for the expenses of the Sansthan  but the tenor of the documents shows that the offering iS made to the Shankaracharya himself
 662 The relevant provisions of the Bombay Public Trust Act 1950 Bombay Act XXXIX of 1950 hereinafter referred to as the Act are as follows The preamble of  the Act reads An Act to regulate and to make better provision for the administration of public religious and charitable trusts in the State of Bombay
 It would be noticed that the intention is only to deal with the trusts which are in the State of Bombayit is not the idea to regulate or make better provision for the administration of trusts outside the State of Bombay and one of the questions which we have to answer is whether Nasik Math can be said to be in the State of Bombay
The word math is defined in section 2 9  of the Act to mean an institution for the promotion of Hindu religion presided over by a person whose duty it is to engage himself in imparting religions instructions or rendering spiritual services to a body of disciples or who exercises or claims to exercise head ship over such a body and includes places of religious worship or instruction which are appurtenant to the institution Public trust is defined in section 2 13 to mean an express or constructive
trust for either a public religions or charitable purpose or both and includes a temple a math a wakf a dharmada or any other religious or charitable endowment and a society formed either for a religious or charitable purpose or for both and registered under the 
 The definition of temple may also be noted
Temple means a place by whatever designation known and used as a place of public religious worship and dedicated to or for the benefit of or used as of right by the Hindu community or any section thereof as a place of public religious worship
Is 217
 Section 18 of the Act provides for registration of public trusts and makes it the duty of the Trustees of a public trust to which the Act applies to make an application for the registration of the public trust
It is under this section that an application was made under protest by one YM Krishnamurthy Revenue Officer and Incharge Officer Shri Shringeri Mutt and its properties
The Assistant Charity Commissioner held an enquiry under section 19 of the Act and came to the conclusion that a trust existed and it is a public trust and is liable to be registered under the Act
An appeal was taken to the Charity Commissioner
The Deputy Charity Commissioner exercising appellate powers confirmed the findings and order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner
An application was then made under section 72 of the Act to the District Judge to set aside the decision and order of the Deputy Charity Commissioner but the District Judge confirmed 663 the order and dismissed the petition
He held that this institution must be considered as a Branch Mutt even though its origin may be the Samadhis or tombs of the Shankaracharya of the name Abhinava Sachhidanand Bharati He further came to the conclusion that the evidence on the record shows that this Institution at Nasik is a place of religious worship within the meaning of the definition in section 29 of the Act He observed There is no dispute that there are idols of Shri Adya Shankaracharya and Shri Dattaraya in this institution and worship of those idols is carried on there
The festivals which are held and which are attended by the public who are invited on such occasions are the Jayantis of Shri Shankaracharya and the deity of Shri Dattatraya
In this behalf the printed invitations Exhibits 1229 1230 and 1231 may be perused
There is also day to day worship of these deities which is carried on by the pujaris He further observed Considering from this point of view this place would be a place of religious worship and there is no dispute that at any rate it is appurtenant to the main institution or the Muth at Shringeri He further held that this institution or Foundation at Nasik is admittedly a Branch of the Muth at Shringeri which is founded by Adya Shankaracharya and this Branch would partake of the nature of the main or principal Institution at Shringeri He accordingly held that it would be idle to contend that this institution at Nasik would not come within even what is called the inclusive portion  of the definition of Muth  enacted in Section 29 of the Act
The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the Nasik Math is an independent Math within section 29 of the Act and therefore covered by the provisions of the Act at any rate even if the Nasik Math is an adjunct of or dependent upon the principal math at Shringeri it is covered by the Act
In Maharajkumari Umeshwari Kuer vs The State of Bihar1 while considering the provisions of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act 1950 Bihar Act 1 of 1951 Gajendragadkar J as he then was speaking for the Court observed On behalf of the petitioner the learned Attorney General has contended that as a result of our decisions in the group of cases to which we have already referred it is now established that before the Act can apply two 1 petition No 405 of 1955 decided on December 15 1960
664 conditions must be satisfied first that the religious trust or the institution itself must be in Bihar and second part of its property must be situated in the State of Bihar
Since the first of these two conditions is not satisfied in the present case the Act cannot apply
In our opinion this contention is well rounded and must be upheld
 The facts in that case were that a temple was situated at Vrmdavan Dham in the District of Mathra in Uttar Pradesh
In this temple were installed the family idol of Shri Radha Gopalji as well as the idol of Radhendra Kishorji in 1872 and 1877 respectively by Maharani Inderjit Kuer of Tikari
The said Maharani created a waqf of certain properties known as Balkbar Mahal in the District of Gaya by a registered deed of endowment on July 25 1872 for the purpose of meeting the expenses relating to food offering prayers and worship in the said temple
The Trust owns properties also in Bihar  This Court repelled the contention that since the Trustees reside in Bihar and the Trust is substantially administered in Bihar the provisions of the Bihar Act would be applicable and observed It is the situs of the trust of the principal institution or temple with which the trust is integrally connected that determines the applicability of the Act
The properties in question which are situated partly in Uttar Pradesh and partly in Bihar belong to the temple and the deity is their owner
This deity is enshrined in the temple situated at Vrindavan Dham and so it is common ground that the situs of the temple is outside Bihar
It is also admitted that part of the properties belonging to the trust are in Uttar Pradesh
Therefore the two tests laid down by this Court inevitably lead to the conclusion that the present trust is outside the purview of the Act
The fact that the trustees reside in Bihar or that the trust is partially administered in Bihar for charitable purposes can make no difference to this position
 In Mahant Ramswarup vs Motiram Khandu1 a case governed by the Bombay Public Trusts Act Shelat J observed There
is no dispute that the trust is administered at Burhanpur and the bulk of its properties except the three  pieces of lands situate in the District of Dhulia are all situate in the Madhya Pradesh State
The fact that a part of its properties is situate in Maharashtra 1 1968 Mh
LJ 363
665 State though the trust is within Madhya Pradesh State would not mean that the trust would be governed partly by the Madhya Pradesh Act and partly by the Bombay Act
Such a division of the Trust and its administration is not contemplated by either of the two Acts
 It seems to us that in view of the above authorities in order o determine the situs of the trust which consists of a Math and subordinate so called math or maths it is the situs of the principal math which will determine the applicability of the Act
We need not here decide the position of an independent real math bough connected with another math
The  High Court has ound in this case that in the Nasik Math no religious instructions are imparted and no spiritual service is rendered to any body of disciples
Further no member of the public is allowed 0 enter the place of worship without permission although worship s carried out by the Pujaris according to vedic usage
In view these findings the Nasik Math cannot be held to be a real math or temple within the definitions set out above
In our opinion the High Court was right in holding that the Nasik Math is not liable to be registered under the Act
The appeal accordingly fails and is dismissed with costs
RKPS Appeal dismissed


Summary:
The Assistant Charity Commissioner Bombay held an enquiry under section 19 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act 1950 and came to the conclusion that the Nasik branch of the principal Shringeri Math situated in the State of Mysore was a public trust and liable to be registered under section 18 the Act
The Charity Commissioner in appeal confirmed this finding and an application under section 72 to the District Judge by the respondent was rejected on the view that the institution at Nasik was a place of religious worship within the meaning of the definition in section 29 of the Act
However the High Court allowed an appeal and set aside the order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner
On appeal to this Court by a certificate HELD The High Court was right in holding that the Nasik Math was not liable to be registered under the Act
The High Court had found in the present case that in the Nasik Math no religious instructions were imparted and no spiritual service was rendered to any body of disciples
Furthermore no member of the public was allowed to enter the place of worship without permission although worship was carried on by the Pujaris according to Vedic usage
In view of these findings the Nasik Math could not be held to be a real Math or temple within the definition in section 29 of the Act
665 B D HELD also In order to determine the situs of  the trust which consists of a Math and a subordinate so called Math or Maths it  is the situs of the principal Math which will determine the applicability of the Act
665 B Maharaikumari Umeshwari Kuer vs The State of Bihar Petition No 405 of 1955 decided on December 15 1960 and Mahant Ramswarup vs Motiram Khandu 1968 Mh
LJ 363 referred to