Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowments amendment act 2010 Page 1 of about 84 results (0.037 seconds)

Dec 09 2011 (HC)

Narayanan Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu and ors.

Court : Chennai

..... of sections 78, 79(3) and 109 of the tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowments act, 1959 (act 22 of 1959) (in short the hr & ce act) as amended by tamil nadu act 39 of 1996 as well as by amended act 28 of 2003 as ultra vires the constitution of india. 3. the appellants and the petitioner in w.p.no.20487 of 2010 claim to be the tenants / lessees in occupation of ..... authorities of the institutions. at present there is no specific provision in the tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowments act, 1959 (tamil nadu act 22 of 1959) to increase the lease rent and to take action against lessees when they refuse to pay the revised lease rent. the government have, therefore, decided to amend the tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowments act, 1959 (tamil nadu act 22 of 1959) so as to make provisions to constitute a committee to ..... court. 79-b. penalty for offences in connection with encroachment.- (1) no person, on or after the commencement of the tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowments (amendment) act, 1996 (tamil nadu act 39 of 1996) shall occupy, otherwise than by lawful possession, any property belonging to a charitable or religious institution or endowment. (2) whoever contravenes the provisions of sub-section (1), shall, on conviction, be punished with imprisonment for a term which .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 25 2011 (HC)

Shifa Housing (P) Ltd. and ors. Vs. Sankaranarayanan Swami

Court : Chennai

..... properties and for declaration of title over the immovable properties of temples under the control of the hindu religious and charitable endowments department ..... court fees and suits valuation act, 1955 (tamil nadu act xiv of 1955), the government of tamil nadu hereby reduces to a maximum of rupees one hundred, the fee payable under the said act in respect of the suits filed by religious institutions for restoration of immovable ..... amendment, which has been directed to be carried out, is allowed based on g.o.ms.no.363 dated 09.04.2010. it is relevant to extract the said g.o., which is as follows: g.o.ms.no.363, home (courts-vi a), 9th april 2010. no.11(2)/ho/720/2010 - in exercise of the powers conferred by section 73 of the tamil nadu ..... , till the disposal of the suit, ordering impleadment of the temple as a party to the suit and amending the particulars in respect of court fee in accordance with g.o.ms.no.363 dated 09.04.2010, which contemplates that the hindu religious and charitable endowments department is liable to pay only rs.100/- as a court fee, respectively. 2.the case of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 05 2012 (HC)

K.Nallathambi. Vs. the State of Tamilnadu and ors.

Court : Chennai

..... .bellie v. the sub registrar, registration office, sulur, coimbatore district reported in 2007 (3) ctc 513 has also made an amendment to the registration act by tamil nadu act 2 of 2009 and empowered to refuse to register in respect of lands relating to tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowment board.4. in any event, this court by judgment in s.rangarajan vs. the district registrar reported in 2008 (4 ..... ) lw 411 held that if the owner has objection to the registration, then the refusal can be made by the registrar. in similar case in m.muthaiya vs. the state of tamil nadu, this court held that ..... since the matters are pending before the court in w.p.no.17500 of 2010, no action can be taken on the document.2. the contention of the petitioner was that the respondents have no right to refuse to register the document on the ground that the tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowments board had stayed the registration of the sale deed and the writ petition ..... commissioner, hr & ce department, a counter affidavit dated 25.4.2012 has been filed. it is also brought to the notice of this court that w.p.no.17500 of 2010 filed by one vijayakumar was allowed by this court on 5.1.2012 on the ground that g.o.ms.no.150, commercial tax department dated 22.9.2000 was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 2011 (HC)

R.Lakshmi Narasimha Bhattar and ors. Vs. the Commissioner and ors.

Court : Chennai

..... paise. as per the service rules framed for the staff of the thirukovil, a servant had to be retired at the age of 60 years. by the amended act (tamil nadu act 2/1971) made to the tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowments act, 1959, all the services rendered on the basis of the legal heirship or mirasi right were abolished. the temple can appoint anyone for performing such duties who ..... sannathi with effect from 1.6.2011, the said sridhar was directed to recite the panchangam. it was also stated that the trustee board resolution no.158, dated 27.5.2010 was passed to retire lakshmi narasimha bhattar who had attained the age of 60 years. reading of panchangam at the time of viswaroopam done by him only as a servant ..... present. petition was given to examine the witnesses on the side of respondent. 15.09.2010 08.09.2010 present present. statement of witnesses filed 23.09.2010 signed in the case records absent absent 19.10.2010 14.10.2010 absent absent 09.11.2010 vaikunda ekadasi festival 04.11.2010 absent absent 25.02.2011 21.02.2011 absent. despite direction by the high court ..... senior counsel was away, sought for adjournment 11.03.2010 09.03.2010 adjournment was sought through phone. counsel not present. counsel present 19.03.2010 16.03.2010 advocate boycott. the case adjourned 15.04.2010 12.04.2010 counsel present and sought adjournment present 03.05.2010 26.04.2010 present present. respondent cross examined. 05.06.2010 counsel signature obtained in case record absent absent. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 04 2012 (HC)

V.Ananda Mudaliar Vs. the Secretary to Government, and ors.

Court : Chennai

..... 1959, is under challenge. similarly placed persons challenged the notice issued under section 78 of the act and was dismissed by this court in w.p.no.13906 of 2008 etc. batch on ..... 01.2010 signed on 1.2.2012.2. heard mrs.manjula baskar, learned counsel for the petitioner, mr.s.kandasamy, learned special government pleader for the respondents 1 to 3 and mr.k.chandrasekaran, learned counsel for the fourth respondent.3. the encroachment notice issued under section 78 of the hindu religious and charitable endowments act, ..... writ petitions cannot be dealt with by this court. the constitutional validity of section 78, 79(3) and 109 of the tamil nadu h.r. & c.e. act, 1959, as amended by act 28 of 2003 was challenged in a batch of cases before this court. this court by a judgment dated 28.10.2008 ..... in adivaram varthagargal sangam, palani represented by its secretary vs. state of tamil nadu reported in 2009(1) tncj 319 madras upheld the ..... certiorari, call for the records and quash the proceedings of the third respondent in his villupuram mandalam arivippu enn 85/08/e2/dated 06.01.2010 signed on 1.2.2012.r.sudhakar, j.order1. writ petition is filed praying to issue a writ of certiorari, call for the records .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 2012 (HC)

P.Sivaji Poosari Vs. the Commissoner

Court : Chennai

..... , madurai is under the administration and supervisory control of the tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowments department and as a result, the same has been included in the list published under section 46 of the act. it was also admitted that the temple was declared as an excepted one by the erstwhile hindu religious endowments board in its board's order no.2074 (o.a.no ..... of the 3rd respondent is not only barred by section 29-a(iv) of the hindu succession (tamil nadu amendment)act, 1989 but also by article 107 of the limitation act, the direction issued by the first respondent that the scheme can be framed even for a religious institution which is constituted by hereditary trustees at the instance of the 3rd respondent is ..... nothing in this chapter shall apply to a daughter married before the date of the commencement of the hindu succession (tamil nadu amendment)act, 1989;a close reading of clause (iv) clearly shows that the daughter married before the date of commencement of the hindu succession (tamil nadu amendment)act, 1989 is not entitled to succeed to the office of trusteeship. as per this section since the ..... . in this context it is also useful to refer to the judgment of this court in parameswari @ gnanasakthi v. raja ratinam (2010 (5) ctc 51) wherein it has been held in paragraph 28 thereof as under:28. the amendment brought by hindu succession (tamil nadu amendment)act, 1989 made the daughters, who were not married on the date of commencement of the said .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 2015 (HC)

A.Rajendran Vs. 1.The Joint Commissioner,

Court : Chennai

..... dispute cannot be adjudicated before the first respondent, under section 151 c.p.c read with 63(e) of the tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowment act 1959. (tamil nadu act 22/1959) and amended act 39/1996. (for short 'the act'). hence, the impugned order passed by the joint commissioner, hindu religious and charitable endowment department, dated 08.07.2015, is liable to be quashed.4. the first respondent has filed a counter stating that ..... festivals in the temple located at foothill for the past 15 years. the respondents 5 & 6, installed the temple in question in the temple located at foothill in the year 2010 with the permission of the hindu religious and charitable endowment department for which there was no objection raised from the akkaripatti village. while so, the private respondents filed an application before the joint commissioner ..... legal submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners in both the writ petitions:- (i) firstly, the joint commissioner, hindu religious and charitable endowment department , madurai cannot adjudicate the inter se disputes under section 151 c.p.c read with 63(e) of the tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowment act,1959. hence, the impugned order passed by the first respondent is without jurisdiction. (ii) secondly, the petitioners who are .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 20 2014 (HC)

The Sanmarga Sangam Vs. P.Srinivasan

Court : Chennai

..... published on 08.12.2010, it was specifically mentioned that the governor of tamil nadu hereby reduces to a maximum of rupees one hundred, the fee payable under the said act in respect of the suits filed by religious institutions for restoration of immovable properties and for declaration of title over the immovable properties of temples under the control of the hindu religious and charitable endowments department. 17.it ..... plaint. even though the trial court allowed the substitution of name of the secretary in both the short and long cause titles, it disallowed the application in respect of third amendment in relation to payment of court fee, which is against law. therefore, the revision petitioner/sangam preferred c.r.p.(pd)no.1624 of 2014. 4.learned counsel for the ..... and payment of court fee and then they filed their written statement in the suit. the trial court, after hearing both sides, partly allowed the application directing the plaintiff to amend the plaint with regard to the market value of the suit property and to pay the deficit court fee. 3.learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the revision ..... petitioner filed an application in i.a.no.88 of 2013 under order vi rule 17 of c.p.c.to amend the plaint, in which, the plaintiff has sought for three amendments, that is to substitute the secretary name e.palani to the sangam in both the short and long cause titles and also incorporating one portion .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 19 2014 (HC)

K.S.Sharfudeen Vs. 1.Union of India,

Court : Chennai

..... a scheme for the administration of the temple had been framed by the civil court under section 92. when the deputy commissioner of hindu religious and charitable endowments, initiated proceedings in the year 1982, under section 64(5) of the tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowments act, 1959, for the modification of the scheme which was settled earlier by the madras high court itself, the same came to be challenged ..... another aspect of the matter touching on the issue. even after the 1954 act came to be enacted, sections 92 and 93 of cpc continued to be available for the aggrieved persons to get schemes framed in relation to religious institutions including wakfs. an attempt was made under amendment act 69 of 1984 to repeal sections 92 and 93 of cpc by adding ..... item 3-a to sub-section (1) of section 69 of the 1954 act. the date with reference from which that amendment was to come into force was not notified. the ..... consideration before the supreme court was about the striking down of section 3 of the tamil nadu uniform system of school education (amendment) act, 2011 by the high court. it was contended before the supreme court that the 2011 amendment act had the effect of bringing back section 14 of the 2010 act which was earlier declared ultra vires by the high court. it is in this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 2011 (HC)

A.N.Kumar Vs. Arulmighu Arunachaleswarar Devasthanam and ors.

Court : Chennai

..... take action against those lessees, licensees or mortgagees, whose action has marred or is likely to mar the artistic appearance or the religious atmosphere of the religious institution.35. in the tamil nadu hindu religious and charitable endowments act, 1959, no express provision is made to recover possession from tenant, licensee, lessee or mortgagee, which the temple intends to take ..... in the case on hand, the lease is of the year 1937 and therefore provisions of h.r. & c.e.act, 1959 are not applicable. secondly, section 78 was inserted by amendment under tamil nadu act 39 of 1996, which came into force on 9.12.1996 and the suit - c.s.no.1486 of 1988 ..... can be directly instituted in any court of law except and and in conformity with the provisions of the act as per section 108 of tamil nadu h.r. & c.e.act, 1959." in b.shaji's case (2010(3) ctc 851), the learned single judge further held that in view of section 108 of the ..... under sub-section 4 of section 78 can institute a suit in a cviil court to establish that the religious institution or endowment has no title to the property.30. in b.shaji's case, (2010(3) ctc 851), the learned single judge has also held that similar provision has been made in section ..... was filed way back in 1988 and section 78 inserted by amending act 39 of 1996 is not applicable.26. after extracting sections 78 and 79, in b.shaji's case (2010(3) .....

Tag this Judgment!


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