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

1918 Supreme(Mad) 247

Sivaramalinga Dikshatar – Appellant
Versus
Sabharathna Dikshitar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. The Lower Courts have dismissed the plaintiffs suit without any trial holding that it was not maintainable under the Specific Relief Act without a prayer for the possession of the temple and its properties jointly with the defendants. Though a preliminary issue was framed on the point no evidence was given or taken and the question was disposed of solely on the pleadings; we have therefore to decide the question on the same materials.

2. In this plaint the plaintiff states that he is one of the Dikshitars, who are holders of the combined offices of archaka and dharmakartha in the plaint temple, and that as such he is entitled according to the usage of the temple to the right of performing puja for five days once in every 9 months and along with 19 others to the custody of the idols, jewels and other valuables of the temple for 6 months by rotation (apparently once in 6 or 7 years). He states that in 1909 on account of a dispute as to the ownership of a certain plot of land the body of Dikshitars passed a resolution directing him to deliver it up to the temple and inflicted a fine of Rs. 300 on him and suspended him from his office till he obeyed their orders. He complains






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