Back
2005(3) Supreme 412
Supreme Court of India
(From Madras High Court)
B.P. Singh & S.B. Sinha, JJ.
Swamy Atmananda —Appellant
versus
Swami Bodhananda & Ors. —Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3058 of 2000
Decided on 13-4-2005
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appearing Parties : K. Sukumaran, K. Ramamoorthy, L.N. Rao, Sr. Advocates, Dr. A. Francis Julian, Sumit Kumar, Advocates for M/s. Arputham Aruna & Co. Advocates, M.A. Chinnasamy, Mrs. N. Shobha, Sriram Thalapathy, N.K. Arulmuruganandham, Vikas Mehta, Ms. Indu Malhotra, Ms. Mamata Choudhary, P. Neduchezian, C. Paramashivam, R. Ayyam Perumal, Sewa Ram, S. Vallinayagam, Satya Mitra Garg, Advocates.
Judgment
S.B. Sinha, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.10.1999 passed by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Writ Petition No. 15089 of 1998 whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by Swami Bodhananda had been allowed. The said writ petition was filed for issuance of a writ of or in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents therein to give all assistance to the Appellants in taking over management of the institutions specified therein. The said writ petition was filed having regard to the judgment of the Civil Court.
2. A decree passed by the Civil Court must be passed in terms of the provisions contained in the Code of Civil Procedure. The writ petition is not the appropriate remedy therefor. In that view of the matter, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained, which is set aside accordingly. The Appeal is allowed. It, however, goes without saying that the First Respondent herein shall be entitled to execute the decree in accordance with law.
Appeal allowed.
***************
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
