MARKANDEY KATJU, ASOK KUMAR GANGULY
Gangai Vinayagar Temple – Appellant
Versus
Meenakashi Ammal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ashok Kumar Ganguly, J.
I have read the draft judgment prepared by my learned brother, Justice Markandey Katju in this appeal and which was sent to me on 14.8.2009. Unfortunately, I cannot agree with the draft judgment, rendered by His Lordship, dismissing the appeal.
2. I am of the view that the appeal should be allowed and the reasons for the said view are stated herein below.
3. This appeal has been filed on behalf of the temple by the trust committee and also by one of the trustees impugning the judgment and order of Madras High Court dated 6.1.2003 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the present appellants, inter-alia, holding that there is no merit in the appeal.
4. The question involved in the appeal would appear from the discussion of the relevant facts in this case.
5. The property in question belonged to the appellants and was leased out to respondent Nos. 1 to 6 for a period of 15 years with effect from 8.11.1967 and which expired in 1983.
6. On or before 1.7.1976, the property in question was sold by the appellants to defendant Nos. 7, 8 and 9 and to that effect a notice was given to the lessees on 14.10.1976 calling upon them to pay the outstanding
Sajjadanashin Sayed Md. B.E. Edr (D) by Lrs. v. Musa Dadabhai Ummer
Annaimuthu Thevar (dead) by Lrs. v. Alagammal
Swamy Atmananda v. Sri Ramakrishna Tapovanam
Vithal Yeshwant Jathar v. Shikandarkhan Makhtumkhan Sardesai
Commissioner of Endowments v. Vittal Rao
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.