Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.KUMARESH BABU
Dharmarajaaswamy Kovil Devasthabanam, Rep by Managing Trustee J.Dhanalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Idol of Arulmigu Dharmaraja Swamy, Of Sennammanaicken Palayam – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. revision to strike plaint in temple suit. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. private temple funded by endowed properties only. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. no locus for worshipper; hr&ce inapplicable. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. plaint circumvents section 92 cpc requirements. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. strike infructuous proceedings via inherent powers. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. public temple; defunct trust; unauthorized trustees. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 7. o7 r11 on plaint face; art 227 barred. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 8. art 227 cannot supplant o7 r11 remedy. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
ORDER
The Civil Revision Petition filed to strike off the plaint in O.S.No.524/2021 on the file of the I Additional District Munsif Court, Coimbatore.
2. Heard Mr.R.Parthasarathy, learned Senior counsel appearing for Mr.Abishek Jenasenan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr.S.Kumaresan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent.
3. Mr.R.Parthasarathy learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner’s would submit that the Dharmaraja Kovil Temple in Semmanaickenpalayam, Idikari was built by one Ponnammal W/o Nambur Krishnaswamy out of her own funds and has all along been administered as a private family
High Court's Article 227 supervisory jurisdiction barred from rejecting plaint when Order VII Rule 11 CPC offers specific statutory remedy, appealable under Section 96; alternative CPC remedies impos....
Art.227 jurisdiction barred when CPC O.7 R.11 remedy available for plaint rejection.
The character of a temple as public or private is determined by its use for public worship and community management, not solely by registration status.
The determination of a temple's status as public or private hinges on the right of public access and the evidence of dedication to public worship, not merely on the presence of public worship.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for relief sought in writ petitions to be within the scope of the general direction contained in the order of the Apex Court dated ....
A deity cannot be represented in a lawsuit by worshipers without proper legal standing; only identified office bearers of a society can act on its behalf. The temple in question is a private temple b....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the exemption of a society registered under the M.P. Societies Registration Act from the provisions of the M.P. Public Trust Act under Sec. 36 (1-b....
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
