IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ, J.
Shri Uttaradi Mutt & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Karnataka, Rep. by the Principal Secretary & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 103982 of 2023 (GM-RES) C/W Writ Petition No. 103994 of 2023 (GM-RES)
Decided On : 05-06-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks police protection for conducting established religious rituals. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments and contentions presented regarding religious authority. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. court’s observations leading to legal conclusions and past admissions. (Para 16 , 18 , 24) |
| 4. final determination on the rightful authority over the brindavana. (Para 25 , 27) |
| 5. conclusion and directive on who may perform rituals. (Para 28) |
ORDER :
Suraj Govindaraj, J.
1. Shri. Uttaradi Mutt, the petitioner in W.P.No.103982/2023 is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs.
b. Consequently, direct the respondent No.4 authority to allow the application filed by Shri. Uttaradi Mutt dated 08.06.2023, the copy of which is at Annexure-N, and
b(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or a writ order or direction in the nature thereof directing Respondent nos. 1 to 4 to prevent Respondent no.5, including its followers, agents and office bearers and anybody claiming through or under Respondent No.5 from offering prayers or conducting any religious activity in any form including Aradhana, Mahimotsava, Puja, rituals, prayers, Ashtottara, samarpana, etc., in the name of Sri. Jayateertharu at the Brindavana of Sri. Raghuvarya Teertharu at the Navabrindavan Gadde situated on the island named ‘NavaBrindavana Gadde’, bearing Sy.No.192 of Anegundi, Tq: Gangavati, Dist: Koppal; and
c. Grant any other appropriate order, writ or direction as may be necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.
2. Shri. Raghavendra Swamy Mutt, the petitioner in W.P.No.103994/2023 is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs.
ii. Direct Respondent No.1 to 3 to provide police protection during Aradhana of Shri. Jayateertharu which is scheduled to take place on 6th July 2023, 7th July 2023 and 8th July 2023.
iii. Grant such other relief’s as is deemed fit.
3. Facts in W.P.No.103982/2023 filed by Shri. Uttaradi Mutt:
3.1. The Petitioner Shri. Uttaradi Mutt, claims to be the main pontifical Mutt in the lineage of the great saint Shri. Madhvacharya.
3.2. Shri Uttaradi Mutt claims to be the owner of the land in Sy.No.192 of Anegundi being an island situate in Tungabhadra river which is known as Nava Brindavana Gadde (Gadde meaning an island). It is contended that several previous pontiffs’ brindavana is situate at Nava Brindavana Gadde, one of them being that of Shri Raghuvarya Teertharu who was the predecessor/Peetadhipati of Shri Uttaradi Mutt.
3.3. It is contended that the brindavana of Shri Jaya Teertharu is at Malkhed, taluka Sedam, District Kalaburagi which is acknowledged by the general public. It is contended that there is no dispute as regards the said brindavana but now the dispute has been raised by Shri Raghavendra Swamy Mutt as regards the brindavana of Shri Raghuvarya Teertharu by contending that it is not of Shri Raghuvarya Teertharu but of Shri Jaya Teertharu.
3.4. Various averments have been made as regards the ownership of the said land which is not relevant for the purpose of this matter since ownership dispute is not being considered in the present matter which is part of another proceeding.
3.5. It is contended that there has been an admission on part of Shri Raghavendra Swamy Mutt that brindavana of Shri Raghuvarya Teertharu being situate at Nava B
Sohan Lal vs. Union of India and Another
Basant Singh vs. Janki Singh and other
Mahant Shri Srinivas Ramanuj Das v. Surjanarayan Das
ABL International Ltd. v. Export Credit Guarantee Corpn. of India Ltd.
State of Bihar v. Jain Plastics and Chemicals Ltd.
Gunwant Kaur v. Municipal Committee, Bhatinda
Century Spg. and Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. Ulhasnagar Municipal Council
Himmatlal v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Most Rev. P.M.A. Metropolitan v. Moran Mar Marthoma
His Holiness Srimad Perarulala Ethiraja Ramanuja Jeeyar Swami v. State of T.N.
Rev. Stainislaus v. State of M.P.
S.T. Chendikamba v. K.I. Viswanathamayya
Roshina T. v. Abdul Azeez K.T.
Mohan Pandey v. Usha Rani Rajgaria
Dwarka Prasad Agarwal v. B.D. Agarwal
Thansingh Nathmal v. Supdt. of Taxes
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....
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.
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 ....
Constructive res judicata and CPC principles apply to writ petitions, barring new unraised claims like superior priest office; no liberty to withdraw for fresh suit to prevent abuse of process and re....
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.