SATHISH NINAN
Ravindran, S/o. Korambil Govindan – Appellant
Versus
Thrivikraman Namboothiri, S/o. Animangalath Subramaniyan Namboodiri – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Is the plaint scheduled temple a private temple belonging to the plaintiffs or is it a public temple, is the short question involved in this appeal. The relief claimed is, for a declaration regarding the status of the temple and a consequential injunction not to interfere with its administration. The suit was dismissed by the trial court. The decree was reversed in appeal, and the suit decreed as prayed for. Hence this appeal by the defendants.
2. The first plaintiff is the deity and the second plaintiff is the senior most member of the family-the Animangalath Illom. The 2nd plaintiff claims title over the plaint schedule temple and its properties under Ext.A1 Partition Deed of the year 1968 executed in the family. In the said partition, the temple and its properties were set apart to the 2nd plaintiff's branch. According to the second plaintiff, there is a “kottil” attached to the temple wherein the karanavan of one Varikkassery family is being worshipped. The 2nd plaintiff entrusted the management of the temple to one Varikkasseri Mohanan, and he was managing the affairs. Recently he expressed difficulties to continue with the management. The defendants are attempting to
Bala Shankar Maha Shanker Bhattjee & Ors. v. Charity Commissioner
Goswamy Shri Mahalaxmi Vahuji v. Shah Ranchhoddas Kalidas (dead) & Ors. [AIR 1970 SC 2025]
Kidangoor Devaswom v. Krishna Namboothiri [2016 (1) KLT 778]
Sri Radhakanta Deb & Anr. v. Commissioner of Hindu Religious Endowments, Orissa [1981 (2) SCC 226]
Sree Kandakarna Kshethra v. Karunakara Thandar [1994 (2) KLT 246]
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.