SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1937 Supreme(Mad) 38

VENKATASUBBA RAO
The President of the Board of Commissioners for the Hindu Religious Endowments – Appellant
Versus
Thadikonda Koteswara Rao – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Venkatasubba Rao, J.

1. The principal question that has been argued in this batch of appeals is, whether the property in question in each case is held upon trust for the deity or whether the archakas possess in it any beneficial interest. Section 69 of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act provides for payment of contributions by temples in order that certain expenses may be met. The amount of the contribution depends on the income of the temple and for the purpose of determining what the income is, the question becomes important under Section 70 whether a particular property belongs to the institution or not. The last mentioned section has since been amended, but the provision as it stood before the amendment, overns the present case. The contribution, the section enacted, was to be assessed on and notified to the trustee who would be bound to pay the amount within a certain prescribed time, from the funds of the temple concerned. " In default of his doing so ", the section went on to enact:

The Court shall on the application of the President of the Board or Committee recover the amount as if a decree had been passed for the amount by the Court against the religious endo






































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top