Temple Money Belongs To Deity, Can't Be Used For Survival Of Cooperative Banks : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Friday observed that temple money belonged to the deity and cannot be used to enrich cooperative banks. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing the petitions filed by some cooperative banks in Kerala challenging a direction issued by the Kerala High Court to return the deposits the Thirunelly Temple Devaswom.

During the hearing, the bench asked what was wrong with the High Court's direction.

"You want to use the temple money to save the bank?What is wrong with directing that the temple money, instead of being in a cooperative bank which is breathing with great difficulty, should go to a healthy nationalised bank which can give maximum interest?" CJI Kant asked.

"Temple money, first of all, belongs to the deity. So therefore, this money has to be saved, protected and utilised only for the interests of the temple. It can't become a source of income or survival for a cooperative bank," CJI added.

Advocate Manu Krishnan G, the counsel for the petitioners (banks), submitted that the "abrupt" direction issued by the High Court to return the deposits within two months was causing difficulties.

"You should establish your credibility among the people. If you are unable to attract the customers and deposits, that is your problem," CJI observed.

Justice Bagchi added that the banks were supposed to immediately release the amounts when the deposits matured. The counsel replied that there was no request for closure and asserted that there was no complaint by the customer. "We have been providing them services as per their needs. We have also started a special branch in their premises as per request. They have been consistently renewing the FDs. Now, all of a sudden...." the counsel submitted. He clarified that the banks were not opposed to closing the deposit; but the abrupt direction to return will cause hardship.

The bench ultimately dismissed the petitions, giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the High Court seeking an extension of time.

The petitions were filed by Manathnawady Co-operative Urban Society Ltd and Thirunelly Service Cooperative Bank Ltd, challenging the judgment passed by a division bench of the High Court in August. The Thirunelly Devaswom approached the High Court aggrieved by the refusal of the co-operative banks to repay the fixed deposits in spite of repeated requests.

The High Court directed the banks - Thirunelly Service Cooperative Bank Ltd, Susheela Gopalan Smaraka Vanitha Cooperative Society Ltd, Manathawady Co-operative Rural Society Ltd, , Manathawady Co-operative Urban Society Ltd and Wayanad Temple Employees Cooperative Society Ltd - to close the deposits of the Devaswom and repay them within two months.

Case : THE THIRUNELLY SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD AND ANR.v. SREE THIRUNELLY DEVASWOM AND ORS.SLP(C) No. 34386/2025 and THE MANANTHAWADY CO-OPERATIVE URBAN SOCIETY LTD AND ANR v.RAVI ULLIYERI AND ORS.Diary No. 64079-2025