Back
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
Uttaradi Mutt – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka, Rep. by the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Bengaluru – Respondent
ORDER :
Pradeep Singh Yerur, J.
Heard learned Senior counsel Shri S.P. Shankar on behalf of learned counsel Shri Phaniraj Kashyap, learned Senior counsel Shri Jayakumar S. Patil, and learned Senior counsel Shri Ameetkumar Deshpande on behalf of learned counsel Sri Satish S. Raichur for the petitioners in both these matters i.e., on behalf of Shri Raghavendra Swami Mutt and Shri Uttaradi Mutt, respectively.
2. These two petitions are filed by petitioners challenging the order passed by the Tahasildar dated 27.06.2023, wherein the Tahasildar has rejected the applications of both petitioners, namely two factions i.e., Shri Raghavendra Swami Mutt and Shri Uttaradi Mutt, who sought police protection for performing Aradhana of Shri Jayateertharu from 06.07.2023 to 08.07.2023 at Navabrindavana Gaddi and a similar application made by Uttaradi Mutt for celebrating of Raghuvarya Theerthara Mahimotsava for the dates from 04.07.2023 to 10.07.2023 at Navabrindavana Gaddi in Sy.No.192 of Anegundi, Gangavathi taluk, Koppal district.
3. It is very unfortunate to note that the great saint Shri Madhwacharya was philosopher, theologian and chief proponent of "Dvaita school of Vedanta" sadly his lineage d
The court affirmed the established rights of the petitioner to perform religious rites at a disputed site, directing state authorities to ensure protection and prevent contrary actions by rival claim....
The fundamental right to freely practice religion under Article 25(1) is protected, and any prohibitory orders lacking natural justice are null and void.
The court ruled that the Udayasthamana Pooja's status as a religious practice must be established in civil court, and the Managing Committee's decisions regarding rituals are not subject to judicial ....
The right to assemble peacefully and protest is a fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b), and 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India. The police cannot reject permission for a ....
Once the Court has intrinsic material to accept that the faith or the belief is genuine and not a pretence, it must defer to the belief of the worshipper This, we must do well to recognise, applies a....
A suit for declaration of title to property and for permanent injunction is not maintainable without notice under Section 80 of the C.P.C. if the defendants are claiming title to the property.
Point of law : Right need to be balanced with other contrasting fundamental rights and is subject to reasonable restrictions indicated in Articles 19(2) and (3). Therefore, the mere fact that batch o....
The court affirmed that the Tantri's decision is final in religious matters, allowing the Guruvayoor Devaswom Managing Committee to shift the 'Illam Nira' ceremony venue without violating statutory p....
Parties in religious disputes can assert rights based on historical practices and public endowment; possession can confer title through adverse possession.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
