Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: hindu religious institutions and charitable endowments act 1997 section 10 qualifications for archakas Year: 1967

Mar 21 1967 (HC)

Vallabharana Swami Varu (Deity) of Swarna Vs. Devi Hanumacharyulu and ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-21-1967

Reported in : AIR1969AP392

..... it does not fall within the definition of religious institution or endowment. that it is a personal grant in favour of the archaka burdened with service and that in such a case, the respondents are not entitled to levy any contribution under section 76 of the hindu religious & charitable endowments act. 1951, corresponding to section 59 of the new andhra pradesh charitable and hindu religious institution and endowments act (xvii of 1966). in view of the ..... the court fee payable on the memorandum of appeal. writ petition no. 691/59:10. one of the archaka-respondents in the above appeal filed this writ petition for the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents i.e. the commissioner. hindu religious and charitable endowments. hyderabad the assistant commissioner. district collector and tahsildar. bapatla to forbear from collecting ..... on behalf of the respondent. ex. a. 8 and ex. a 9 are the re-survey and settlement registers which described the deity as the pattadar and ex. a 10 to ex. a 17 are the extracts from the adangal (cultivation) registers wherein also it is shown that the patedar is the deity. relying on the above documents. the ..... included in the total extent of the grant. column 8 shows that it is devadayam for the archakatwam service or rendering daily worship to the akhandam or maintaining lamp, column 10 shows that it is hereditary. in column 11, referring to the name of the grantor. it is stated that the name of the grantor is unknown. from the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 1967 (SC)

S. Govinda Menon Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-02-1967

Reported in : AIR1967SC1274; 1967(0)KLT336(SC); (1967)IILLJ219SC; (1967)IILLJ249SC; [1967]2SCR566

..... .e. (admn.) department from 1-2-1957 to 19-10-62. under section 29 of the madras hindu religious and charitable endowments act of 1951, any exchange, sale or mortgage and any lease for a term exceeding 5 years of any immovable property belonging to or given or endowed for the purpose of any religious institution shall be null and void unless it is sanctioned by the ..... commissioner as being necessary or beneficial to the institution. under the proviso to the section, ..... performance of your statutory duties under the madras hindu religious and charitable endowments act or as a responsible officer of the government. 2. that you had fixed the premium for lease, the rental and the timber value arbitrarily disregarding whether they were beneficial to the institutions as you were required to do under the act and you thereby caused wrongful gain to ..... the appellant as correct. rule 4(1) does not impose any limitation or qualification as to the nature of the act or omission in respect of which disciplinary proceedings can be instituted. rule 4(1)(b) merely says that the appropriate government competent to institute disciplinary proceedings against a member of the service would be the government under whom .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 1967 (HC)

Tirumalaisami Naicker Vs. Villagers of Kadambur, Athur Taluk, Represen ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-01-1967

Reported in : AIR1969Mad108

..... our learned brother, kailasam, j. first it is contended that the suit not having been instituted in conformity with and as provided for under the madras hindu religious and charitable endowments act, madras act xix of 1951, hereinafter referred to as the act, it is barred under section 93 of the act. next it is submitted that the suit is bad for non-joinder of the other trustees ..... of the religious institution in question.2. the appellant before us is the first defendant in a suit ..... the case of the plaintiff that the first defendant fraudulently obtained an order from the hindu religious and charitable endowments board to the effect that the suit property is a property of the temples. it is seen that on proceedings taken by the first defendant under section 87 of the act (miscellaneous petition no. 73 of 1957) for possession of the suit property, the ..... was built by the villagers it had been dedicated to the temples in the village and therefore it is a public religious institution, the first defendant strenuously contended that the suit should have been in conformity with section 62 of the act, filed in the sub-court, which alone had jurisdiction. a plea of non-joinder of the other trustees of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 1967 (HC)

The All India Sai Samaj (Registered) by Its President D. Bhima Rao Vs. ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-23-1967

Reported in : (1967)2MLJ618

..... hindu religious and charitable endowments act is applicable to this case can be sustained.8. the preamble of madras act xxii of 1959 states that the act is enacted to amend and consolidate the law relating to the administration and governance of hindu religious and charitable institutions and endowments in the state of madras. section 1(3) of the act provides that the act is applicable to all hindu public religious institutions and endowments ..... file a suit. the contention on behalf of the petitioner is that the question is not one under section 63 of the act as to whether the institution is a religious institution or not; but the question is whether the institution is a hindu religious institution ..... that the order of the deputy commissioner under section 63 of the act is subject to a right of appeal and suit under the act and the alternate remedies have not been availed of. section 69(1) of the act provides for an appeal to the commissioner and section 10(1) of the act confers on an aggrieved party, a right to ..... to which the act is applicable .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 1967 (SC)

Secretary, Home (Endowments), Andhra Pradesh Vs. Digyadarsam Rajindra ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-03-1967

Reported in : AIR1968SC105; [1967]3SCR891

..... madras hindu religious & charitable endowments act, 1951 (act xix of 1951), (hereinafter called the act), which is applicable to the state of andhra pradesh, and assumed charge, on march 24, 1962, of the math and its properties. the respondent filed, on march 26, 1962, o. s. 24 of 1962, for a declaration that he is the rightful successor to the office of the mahant of the institution in ..... having obtained the consent in writing of the commissioner,, to institute a suit to obtain a decree for removing the trustee of a math or a specific endowment, attached to a math, for any one or more of the grounds mentioned in cls. (a) to (f) therein. section 53, which is the material section, in and which relates to filling of vacancies, is as ..... arrangement the commissioner shall have due regard to the claims of the disciplines of the math, if any. (4) nothing in this section shall be deemed to affect anything contained in the madras court of wards act, 1902.' 13. section 53(1) contemplates four contingencies, under which the assistant commissioner may take steps for the temporary custody and protection of the math. we ..... decision, in o. s. 50 of 1962 on these grounds the high court quashed the order passed by the state government dated september 9, 1966, placing the petitioner, under suspension. 10. mr. ram reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, has raised the same contentions that were taken, before the high court. in addition, counsel has also pointed out that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 1967 (HC)

T.R. Venkatarama Iyer Vs. the Government of Madras, Revenue Department ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-31-1967

Reported in : (1967)2MLJ543

..... or any of the provisions of the act to be extended only in particular contingencies to hindu public charitable endowments, section 1(3) of the act extends the provisions of the act, automatically to all hindu public religious institutions and endowments. religious endowments is defined in section 6(17) of the act to mean all property endowed for the support of maths or temples, or given or endowed for the performance of any service or ..... . the inspector sent a report to the hindu religious and charitable endowment board on 10th november, 1962, in which he reported that the trustee had mismanaged the trust funds, and recommended the extension of all the provisions of the act. thereafter the government issued a notification under section 3 of the act in memorandum no. 44601 u2/62-10 dated 23rd april, 1963 calling upon the ..... is also his residence) on 23rd october, 1962 and waited from 10 o'clock to 5-30 p.m. but the inspector was not present and the petitioner was not heard at all. thereafter the petitioner sent a communication immediately to the authorities of the hindu religious and charitable endowment board explaining the fact of his having waited at the residence of the ..... in fact there is no denial in the counter-affidavit of the department of the petitioner's claim that he went and waited at the residence of the inspector from 10 o'clock till 5-30 p.m. on 23rd october, 1962.6. the learned government pleader submits that apart from the question of the holding or the non-holding .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 29 1967 (HC)

V. Solamalayan Poojari (Deceased) and ors. Vs. the Commissioner, Hindu ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-29-1967

Reported in : (1968)1MLJ105

..... suit but the appellate court dismissed the suit holding that the provisions of section 79(a) of the hindu religious and charitable endowments act (ii of 1927) (as amended by act v of 1944 and act x of 1946) barred the jurisdiction of the civil court. section 79 read:save as otherwise expressly provided in or under this act nothing herein contained shall effect any established usage of a math or ..... against the abovesaid order of the commissioner for hindu religious and charitable endowments.3. the word 'emolument' has been defined in the concise oxford dictionary as 'profit from office or employment, salary '. it is therefore clear that when section 63(e) of the act speaks of a person being entitled by custom or otherwise to an emolument in any religious institution, and he seeks for relief in respect ..... of an archaka which carries with it certain emoluments. because there is such a distinction according to the commissioner, the special provision in section 63(e) conferring jurisdiction to decide a dispute about the right to receive emoluments was sufficient to confer also jurisdiction to decide a dispute regarding succession to the office of poojari and other employees under the religious institution to which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 1967 (HC)

Sri La Sri Ajabanatessara Pandara Sannadhi, Hereditary Madathipathi an ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-31-1967

Reported in : (1967)2MLJ317

..... (1965) 2 s.c.j. 711 : (1965) 2 m.l.j.167 : (1965) 2 a.w.r. (167. the decisions relate to section 64(4) of the madras hindu religious and charitable endowments act of 1951 which provided that every notification under the section shall remain in force for a period of five years but it may by notification be cancelled at any time or continued from ..... repugnant to the scheme in the suit providing for appointment of a hereditary trustee and two non-hereditary trustees is section 47(2) of the act. section 47(2) provides that where in the case of any institution included in the list published under section 46 having a hereditary trustee or trustees, the commissioner after notice to such trustee or trustees and after such inquiry ..... be properly managed by the hereditary trustee or trustees, the commissioner may, by order, appoint such number of non-hereditary trustees as he thinks necessary. according to this sub-section in an institution having a hereditary trustee if the commissioner after notice to the trustees and after such enquiry as he deems adequate considers that the affairs of the temple are not ..... the notice dated 29th june, 1965. the question that has to be considered is whether this sub-section is applicable to the appointment of non-hereditary trustees for the first time after the act came into force or whether it is applicable to all institutions having hereditary trustees to which the vacancies in the office of non-hereditary trustees are to be filled .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 1967 (HC)

Zenith Lamps and Electricals Ltd. Vs. the Registrar, High Court and or ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-31-1967

Reported in : (1968)1MLJ37

..... decision of this court striking down he contribution levied under section 76 of the madras hindu religious and charitable endowments act as a tax and not a fee and as beyond the legislative power of the state. section 76 which was struck down authorised the levy of an annual contribution on all religious institutions, the maximum being fixed at 5 per cent, ..... muhammad salim's case (1886) i.l.r. 8 all. 282, was whether the dismissal of a former suit of the plaintiff therein under section 10 of the court fees act could be regarded as res judicata, barring the subsequent action. it is in this connection that the learned judge observed that the dismissal of a ..... suit under section 10 of the court fees act could never operate as res judicata, so as to bar a fresh action. he said (at page 286):now what i wish to say ..... and 1,424 for the entire state. in 1954, out of 11,998 suits instituted in the city, only 303 suits the claim exceeded rs. 10,000. for the entire state, out of 1,01,335 suits, only 911 exceeded rs 10,000 in value. in 1955, out of a total of 2,22,398 suits ..... respectively. this increase is marked in the sub-courts outside the city. suits exceeding rs. 10,000 in value filed in the high court in the respective years are 50,145 and 66 only. we do not have statistics of institution of suits over rs. 50,000 in value, or even of suits exceeding rs. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 1967 (HC)

Samba Nataraja Dikshitar Vs. Kalyanasabesa Dikshitar, the Present Secr ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-29-1967

Reported in : (1968)1MLJ153

..... formidable bar is in the provisions of the madras hindu religious and charitable endowments act (xix of 1951) now repealed by madras act (xxii of 1959). there is little difference between the two acts in regard to the concerned provisions. section 49 of madras act (xix of 1951) runs as follows:(1) all office-holders and servants attached to a religious institution or in receipt of any emolument or perquisite therefrom ..... protest and it is stated that he went up in appeal to the deputy commissioner, hindu religious and charitable endowments. the plaintiff's next turn came on 20th january, 1959 and 21st january, 1959. he failed to discharge his duties on these two days and he was again fined rs. 10 per each day. the fine amounts were not paid and so they were enhanced ..... contained in rule books and resolutions of the general body made from time to time. while as podu dikshidars they constitute a body of trustees of the temple, when they act as archakas they will be servants of the trustees, that is, then they carry out their obligations to the temple, and are subject to the disciplinary jurisdiction of the body of ..... temple which the matathipathi enjoys in relation to that income from the mutt and its properties. in essence here the plaintiff is asserting his personal rights which have been forfeited.10. when a plea is put forward that in any matter the jurisdiction of a civil court to entertain a suit is barred, the question has to be examined bearing in .....

Tag this Judgment!


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