N.V.RAMANA, AMITAVA ROY
Vijendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner, A. P. Charitable & Religious Institutions & Endowment Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Amitava Roy, J.
1. The appellants in their relentless pursuit for a declaration that the temple, which is the subject matter of the lis is their private place of worship and not a public shrine, has put to challenge the determination to the contrary made by the High Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 10.07.2007 rendered in Letters Patent Appeal No. 393 of 1992. Thereby the verdict of the Single Judge in the writ petition filed by the appellants had been affirmed.
2. We have heard Mr. V.V.S. Rao, learned senior counsel for the appellants and Mr. P. Venkat Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents.
3. The background facts in short need be outlined at the threshold for the desired comprehension of the issue seeking resolution. The flow of events demonstrate that the grandfather of the respondents, Ram Harak Tiwari (since deceased) had acquired the premises in question from one Kondaiah by sale deed dated 18.12.1302 Fasli corresponding to 18.12.1893 (as per English Calendar) and as claimed by them had installed the family idol of Shri Hanuman Ji made of silver which was movable and not attached to the earth exclusively for the worship by the family members. The suit t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.