Skip to content


Gandavathara Ayyangar Vs. Devanayaga Mudali and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectTrusts and Societies
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1883)ILR7Mad222
AppellantGandavathara Ayyangar
RespondentDevanayaga Mudali and ors.
Excerpt:
act xx of 1863, sections 14, 18 - trustee of temple, qualifications of--duty of committee--misfeasance. - .....the dharmakarta should be of the sect to which the temple appertains, but we are hardly prepared to say it amounts to a breach of trust or misfeasance on the part of the committee that they have not insisted on this qualification in making the appointment.2. we cannot hold the judge was bound to accord the sanction prayed, or that he has improperly refused it.3. the application is dismissed with costs.
Judgment:

Charles A. Turner, Kt., C.J.

1. The Act does not require that the person appointed by the committee to be dharmakarta should be of a particular sect. The Legislature having provided this qualification in the case of membership of the committee, may have presumed that the committee would appoint only persons of the sects to which they themselves belonged. The Act did not contemplate the formation of one committee to supervise the religious institutions of different sects, but allows the appointment of several committees. It may be desirable that in each case the dharmakarta should be of the sect to which the temple appertains, but we are hardly prepared to say it amounts to a breach of trust or misfeasance on the part of the committee that they have not insisted on this qualification in making the appointment.

2. We cannot hold the Judge was bound to accord the sanction prayed, or that he has improperly refused it.

3. The application is dismissed with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //