Administration and Social Life under Vijayanagar c8.86

c8.86

The manner in which a temple dispute was decided by one Tirumaḷḷi Nāyaka deserves special mention here. The dispute under question was with regard to the right of worship in the temple of Tirukkāmīśvaram Uḍaiya Nāyaṇār at Āragaḷūr in the Salem district. A complaint was made by the managers of the temple before Tirumaḷḷi Nāyaka who in summing up and communicating his final orders to the managers (*sthānikas*) of that temple said: "(1) A has been enjoying for a long time the privilege of worshipping all the 30 days of the month in the temple, while actually only 15 days belong to him by right and 15 days belong to another person named B. (2) The privilege of B thus enjoyed by A without proper authority, requires settlement; (3) in support of the latter part of the statement made in (1) there are records in the temple to prove that the 15 days of B (now abandoned by him and enjoyed by A) have, under orders, been counted 'unclaimed' (iraṅgal); (4) of this privilege of 15 days so declared unclaimed, you have sold (on your own responsibility) 7½ days to a third person C, and given him a sale deed; (5) by so doing you have deprived the acquired right of A enjoyed by him for the last eight or ten generations; (6) at this stage the nāṭṭār appear to have volunteered to settle the question of enjoyment—A being found issueless (?)—and to have called the parties to present themselves before them together with A; (7) you—the managers—were also required (under my orders) to be present on the occasion, to hear the case, and to carry out the decision arrived at (by the nāṭṭār) and to have in the meantime, during the period of hearing (by the nāṭṭār), the worship of the temple performed by outsiders on payment; (8) A having then appealed to me while I happened to be present at Āragaḷūr to hear his case personally and give a just decision, I and the nāṭṭār together advised the parties to put their case before the Mahājanas and issued an order to this effect; (9) in obedience to our order the Mahājanas of the agrahāras of Kuḷattūr, Ālambaḷam, Śaḍaiyaṉpaṭṭu and Muṭṭiyākuricci heard both sides, and decided that although A may have been the hereditary holder of only 15 days of the privilege it was not fair to sell part of the disputed portion thereof to an outsider like C, while the right to purchase (in virtue of long enjoyment) primarily rested in A; (10) according therefore to this decision of the Mahājanas, we order that A must continue to enjoy the full 30 days as before, and that the sale deed you have given to C should be cancelled."⁵²