question stringclasses 1
value | context stringlengths 51 9.23k | answer stringlengths 152 158k |
|---|---|---|
What is the summary of this judgment? | Appeal No. 92 of 1953. Appeal under section 110 of the Civil Procedure Code from the Judgment and Decree dated the 8th November 1949 of the Bombay High Court in Appeal from Original Decree No. 195 of 1947 arising out of the Judgment and Decree dated 20th December 1946 of the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Shola... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Daphtary, Solicitor General of India (R. A. Govind, with him) for the appellants. J.B. Dadachanji, Sri Narain Andley and Rajinder Narain, for respondents. October 11. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHANDRASEKHARA AIYAR J. This appeal is from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for the poss... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 10.000. The original decree was on 20 12 1946. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim was on 8 11 1949. The defendants applied for leave to appeal to the Federal Court on 6 1 1950. The High Court directed the trial court to find the value of the property which was the subject matter of the suit at... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 'The High Court thereafter granted leave to appeal on 1 10 1951, overruling the objections raised by the plaintiff to the grant of such leave. The maintainability of this appeal has been questioned before us by Mr. Dadachanji, learned counsel for the respondents, in a somewhat lengthy argument. His main contention was ... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Constitution establishing the Supreme Court as the final appellate authority for India came into force on 26 1 1950. Did the vested right become extinguished with the abolition of the Federal Court? If the court to which an appeal lies is altogether abolished without any forum substituted in its place for the dispo... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Article 135 is in these terms: "Until Parliament by law otherwise provides, the Supreme Court shall also have jurisdiction and powers with respect to any matter to which the provisions of article 133 or article 134 do not apply if jurisdiction and powers in relation to that matter were exercisable by the Federal Court ... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | A High Court in the territory of India means a State High Court, and article 133 provides for appeals against any judgment, decree or final order in a civil proceeding of such High Court. Though article 133 does not apply, we have still to see whether it is a matter as regards which jurisdiction and powers were exercis... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It was a matter over which jurisdiction was "exercisable" by the Federal Court. The construction that it was "exercisable" only if the matter was actually pending before the Federal Court and that it could not be said to be pending until the appeal is declared admitted under Order XLV of the Civil Procedure Code is too... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | If we accede to the argument urged by the respondents, we shall be shutting out altogether a large number of appeals, where the parties had an automatic right to go before the Federal Court before the Constitution and which we must hold was taken away from them for no fault of their own, merely because the Supreme Cour... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Sangam lands were held by the eldest branch represented by Yeshwant Rao (son of Panduranga Rao) by right of lineal primogeniture. When Yeshwant Rao and his widow Tarabai died in November 1924, these properties went to the plaintiff Shankar Rao 's branch as the next senior in line. The Peta Velapur Mahal properties ... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | He got a declaratory decree that he was the nearest heir of the deceased Yeshwant Rao, and had a right in such capacity to take possession of ill the properties, excluding the inam income and the Sangam lands specified in Schedule B of the decree and a small item of property situated in the same village and specified i... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Recovery was also sought of some cash and the value of some ornaments and clothes, etc. The claim was resisted by Shankar Rao, and his main plea was that in lieu of the properties claimed, a large number of lands at Sangam had originally been given to the plaintiff 's branch, and that unless those properties were given... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The defendants have made the answer that the items of Sangam lands claimed by the plaintiff were given to their ancestor, Krishna Rao absolutely under the deed of 1867, and that since then they had been in the enjoyment as owners thereof. The Civil Judge dismissed the plaintiff 's suit finding that the case of the plai... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The correctness of the translation is admitted. It was executed by Narsinga Rao of the first branch in favour of Krishna Rao of the last branch, predecessor in title of defendants 1 to 3. After reciting that Krishna Rao was entitled to a one third share in the income appertaining to the Deshmuki rent of the family at P... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Hence on the expiry of 6 years, the period of the mortgage, you may carry on the entire Vahiwat of the land passed in your favour in writing as aforesaid without any hindrance. We have no claim of inheritance left on the aforesaid land". The deed concludes with a provision made for the residence of the donee in an open... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | There is absolutely nothing said about the properties being given for maintenance to ]Krishna Rao. On the other hand, in two places we find that any right to inheritance was given up. In fact, this case of the plaintiff was given up before the trial Judge. It is true that there was an exchange of properties, but there ... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | They did not form the subject matter of the two previous litigations. Since 1867, the date of Exhibit No. 35 they have always been in the possession of the defendants ' branch as owners. It must also be remembered that the earlier suits of 1925 and 1936 proceeded on the basis that the defendants ' branch was the heir t... | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The decree of the High Court is reversed and that of the trial Judge is restored with costs throughout payable by the plaintiff to the defendants. | This appeal to the Supreme Court was from a reversing decree of the Bombay High Court in a suit for possession of certain immovable properties. The suit was dismissed by the trial court on 20 12 1946, the value of properties being found to be over Rs. 10,000. The decree of the High Court allowing the plaintiff 's claim... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | ivil Appeal No. 3388 of 1984. From the Judgment and Order dated 4.4.1989 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in C.R.P. No. 1450 of 1981. A.K. | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Sen, C. Sitaramiah, P.A. Chaudhary, K. Jagannatha Rao, P.R. Ramachandra Murthy, Mrs. Anjani, K. Ram Kumar, Y.P. Rao, P.S.R. Murhty, B. Kanta Rao, N.D.B. Raju, R.N. | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Keshwani, R.F. Nariman, Raj Kumar Gupta, P.C. Kapur, Rajen dra Chaudhary, A. Subba Rao, K.R. Nagaraja, P.K. Rao, A.T.M. Sampath, P.N. | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Ramalingam, R. Venkatramani, G. Narasimhulu, G.N. Rao and S.K. Sucharita for the Appellants. K. Parasaran, T.V.S.N. Chari, Mrs. B. Sunita Rao, Ms. Manjula Gupta and V. Sekhar for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KANIA, J. | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | This is a group of matters comprising Civil Appeal No. 3388 of 1984 in this Court and other cases which have been placed before us for hearing along with this appeal. We propose to deal first with Civil Appeal No. 3388 of 1984. This appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The question involved in the appeal before the High Court from which this appeal arises was whether land which has been agreed to be sold by the owner under an agreement of sale and possession of which was delivered in part performance of the agreement.for sale but pursuant to which no conveyance had been executed till... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Before the said Act was enacted, there was in force in Andhra Pradesh an Act entitled Andhra Pradesh (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1961 which provided for the imposition of a ceiling on holdings of agricultural land. After that Act had been in force for some time, the Central Committee on Land Reforms made ce... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It may be mentioned here that the agricultural land was classified into wet land, dry land and so on and appropriate areas were fixed as ceiling in respect of such lands taking into account the nature and yield capacity of the lands in question. Section 3(i) runs as follows: 224 "3(i): 'holding ' means the entire land ... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Under section 5, the standard holding is fixed taking into account the classification of the land according to the nature of the land. Sub section (1) of section 7 runs as follows: "7(1). Special provision in respect of certain transfers, etc. already made: Where on or after the 24th January, 1971 but before the notifi... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The other sub sections also provide that in the various other circumstances set out therein alienations made will be disregarded for purposes of fixation of ceiling. Section 8 provides, in brief, that every person whose holding on the notified date together with any land trans ferred by him on or after 24th January, 19... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Section 11 deals with the vesting of surrendered lands. Section 12 deals with revision and vesting of lands surrendered. The opening part of that section provides that where any land is surrendered or deemed to have been surren dered under the said Act by any usufructuary mortgagee or a tenant, the possession of such l... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Before going into the merits of the contentions urged and considering the proper interpretation to be given to the relevant sections of the said Act, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the said Act is a piece of agrarian legisla tion enacted with a view to achieve a more equitable distri bution of lands for common g... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The very language of sub section (i) of section 3 indicates that land can be held as contemplated in the said sub section by persons in a number of capacities. The Explanation in plain language states that the same land can be held by 227 one person in one capacity and by another person in a dif ferent capacity and pro... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | In the return submitted by him under the said Act the respondent did not include in his holding the area transferred under the unreg istered sale deeds or the land gifted by him which was in the possession of the purchaser and donee respectively. The Land Reforms Tribunal ignoring the two transfers computed his holding... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | In the context of the definition it is not possible to interpret the term "holding" only in the sense of possession. The Explanation to the definition of the term "holding" clearly contemplates that the same land can be the holding of two different persons holding the land in different capacities, (See page 486). The C... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | To safe guard the interest of the owners in such a case the legisla ture has made a provision in section 12(4) and (5) of the Act. Even so there might be cases where some prejudice might be caused to some tenure holders. " The Court further observed that: "But if the definition of the term 'holding ' is couched in clea... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | vs State of Andhra Pradesh etc. etc., 1 at p. 7 17. In that case one of the contentions urged on behalf of the petition ers was that land transferred by the petitioners under various transfer deeds to the outsiders and who came in possession also could not be included in the holding of the petitioners. This argument wa... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | In these circumstances, even assuming that there is another equally plausible view regarding the construction and the legal effect of section 3(i) of the said Act read with Explana tion, that would not necessarily justify our reconsidering the question which has already been decided by this Court, although the decision... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | In that case a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court took the view that, if the owner of the land has put the transferee in possession of the land in part performance of a contract for sale, such land can be included only in the holding of the transferee and cannot simultaneously be computed in the holding of... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The plain language of section 3(i) read with Explanation supports the view taken by this Court in Mohd. Ashrafuddin 's case (supra). 1t is true that the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the aforesaid judgment has given certain examples 230 where the interpretation which has been given in Mohd. Ashrafu... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It is a notorious fact that there were a large number of cases where agreements for sale or documents for lease in respect of excess lands were executed by owners of lands in excess Of the ceiling area with a view to defeat the provisions of the said Act. In fact, a perusal of the facts in the cases before us generally... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | This circumstance. however. is of a little avail. Where such agreements for sale or of lease are executed in writing and possession is handed over to the purchaser or the lessee, it would be very difficult to show that the transaction was not bona fide although the agreement might well have been executed really with a ... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | In these circumstances, we fail to see any reason to cut down the plain meaning of the provisions of section 3(i) and the Explanation thereto. It was submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the definition of the word 'holding ' contained in sub section (i) of section 3 was an exhaustive definition and that... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | In our opinion, this decision is hardly of any assistance in the matter before us. It is well settled that the provisions in an Act have to be read harmoniously and in the light of the context in which they occur. In our opin ion, there can be no quarrel with the reliance being placed on the Explanation in order to und... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The other connected Civil Appeals and Special Leave Petitions have all been directed to be tagged with the aforesaid Civil Appeal disposed of by us as they involve the same points as raised in the said 232 Civil Appeal. Following our decision, the said Civil Appeals and the Special Leave Petitions are dismissed but wit... | Sub section (i) of section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 defines the expression "holding" as meaning the entire land held by a person as an owner, a limited owner, usufructuary mortga gee, a tenant and as one who is in possession by virtue of a mortgage by conditional... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Civil Appeal No. 668(N) of 1971, From the Judgment and order dated 14.1.1970 of the Bombay High Court in S.C.A. No. 789 of 1969. E.C. Agarwala, Vijay Pandita and Atul Sharma for the Appellant. | % Under an agreement with the respondent landlord, the appellant had been appointed to do worshipping in a temple as pujari to look after the management of two dharamshalas and to cultivate three agricultural, lands, and for all these services, he had been allowed to take crop share the whole crop from the lands cultiv... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KANIA, J. This is an appeal by Special Leave against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court. The facts necessary for the disposal of the Appeal can be shortly stated. The Respondent before us, who was the petitioner before the Bombay High Court, is the... | % Under an agreement with the respondent landlord, the appellant had been appointed to do worshipping in a temple as pujari to look after the management of two dharamshalas and to cultivate three agricultural, lands, and for all these services, he had been allowed to take crop share the whole crop from the lands cultiv... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Respondent 's mother also constructed another dharamshala on a separate piece of land. The facts on record show that Umaji, the father of the Appellant, was appointed a Pujari by the then landlord to worship the idols in the aforesaid temple and to look after the management of the dharamshalas on behalf of the land... | % Under an agreement with the respondent landlord, the appellant had been appointed to do worshipping in a temple as pujari to look after the management of two dharamshalas and to cultivate three agricultural, lands, and for all these services, he had been allowed to take crop share the whole crop from the lands cultiv... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The issue whether the Appellant was the tenant of the said lands was framed and referred to the Tahsildar for decision. The aforesaid issue was decided in the first instance by the Naib Tahsildar. Before him the Appellant contended that he was a deemed tenant as understood under Section 6 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agri... | % Under an agreement with the respondent landlord, the appellant had been appointed to do worshipping in a temple as pujari to look after the management of two dharamshalas and to cultivate three agricultural, lands, and for all these services, he had been allowed to take crop share the whole crop from the lands cultiv... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Against this order the Respondent herein filed an appeal. The Sub Divisional officer, who decided the appeal, set aside the order of Naib Tahsildar and remanded the matter for fresh inquiry on several issues including the issue as to how the Appellant herein came to be in possession of the said lands. The Appellant the... | % Under an agreement with the respondent landlord, the appellant had been appointed to do worshipping in a temple as pujari to look after the management of two dharamshalas and to cultivate three agricultural, lands, and for all these services, he had been allowed to take crop share the whole crop from the lands cultiv... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | This conclusion of the Tribunal was challenged by the Respondent herein before the Bombay High Court. The learned Judge, who disposed of the Special Civil Application or writ petition noted that it was not in dispute that the Appellant was cultivating the said lands but he was doing so and appropriating the crop in lie... | % Under an agreement with the respondent landlord, the appellant had been appointed to do worshipping in a temple as pujari to look after the management of two dharamshalas and to cultivate three agricultural, lands, and for all these services, he had been allowed to take crop share the whole crop from the lands cultiv... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | On these facts, the learned Judge came to the conclusion that the Appellant herein was not entitled to claim the rights of a deemed tenant, and held that the decision to the contrary arrived at by the Tribunal was erroneous and liable to be set aside. The learned Judge allowed the writ petition and quashed the order ma... | % Under an agreement with the respondent landlord, the appellant had been appointed to do worshipping in a temple as pujari to look after the management of two dharamshalas and to cultivate three agricultural, lands, and for all these services, he had been allowed to take crop share the whole crop from the lands cultiv... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It was urged by him that even if the Appellant could be said to be a servant of the Respondent, he was admittedly in lawful personal cultivation of the said lands and was not paid in cash or kind but by way of a crop share, the crop share being equivalent to the entire crop. The Respondent has not chosen to appear befo... | % Under an agreement with the respondent landlord, the appellant had been appointed to do worshipping in a temple as pujari to look after the management of two dharamshalas and to cultivate three agricultural, lands, and for all these services, he had been allowed to take crop share the whole crop from the lands cultiv... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Persons deemed to be tenants. (1) A person lawfully cultivating any land belonging to another person shall be deemed to be a tenant if such land is not cultivated personally by the owner and if such person is not (a) a member of the owner 's family, or (b) a servant on wages payable in cash or kind but not in crop shar... | % Under an agreement with the respondent landlord, the appellant had been appointed to do worshipping in a temple as pujari to look after the management of two dharamshalas and to cultivate three agricultural, lands, and for all these services, he had been allowed to take crop share the whole crop from the lands cultiv... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The landlord did not belong to any of the classes specified in sub section (2) of Section 41. The aforesaid cultivation was 677 clearly lawful because the Respondent to whom the lands belonged had permitted him to do so. It is true that the record shows that this right to cultivate the land and appropriate the produce ... | % Under an agreement with the respondent landlord, the appellant had been appointed to do worshipping in a temple as pujari to look after the management of two dharamshalas and to cultivate three agricultural, lands, and for all these services, he had been allowed to take crop share the whole crop from the lands cultiv... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The learned Judge of the High Court was in error in coming to the conclusion that, merely because the Appellant was a servant of the Respondent, he could not be held to be a tenant in respect of the said lands. The learned Judge altogether failed to notice that although the appellant was a servant, he was not given wag... | % Under an agreement with the respondent landlord, the appellant had been appointed to do worshipping in a temple as pujari to look after the management of two dharamshalas and to cultivate three agricultural, lands, and for all these services, he had been allowed to take crop share the whole crop from the lands cultiv... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | In that case the provision which came up for consideration was Section 4 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1948, the material portion of which runs as follows. "A person lawfully cultivating any land belonging to another person shall be deemed to be a tenant if such land is not. It was held that this Act... | % Under an agreement with the respondent landlord, the appellant had been appointed to do worshipping in a temple as pujari to look after the management of two dharamshalas and to cultivate three agricultural, lands, and for all these services, he had been allowed to take crop share the whole crop from the lands cultiv... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Appeal No. 324 of 1962. Appeal from the judgment and decree dated August 8, 1960 of the Kerala High Court, in O. P. No. 97 of 1953. G.B. Pai, J. | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | B. Dadachanji, O. C. mathur and Ravinder Narain, for the appellant. S.V. Gupte, Additional Solicitor General of India, R. Ganapathy lyer, P. D. Menon and R. H. Dhebar, for the respondent. April 9. The judgment of the Court was delivered by GAjENDRAGADKAR J. The short question which arises in this appeal is whether the ... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 19 of 1952) (hereinafter called 'the Act '). The appellant is a Company which runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. The tile factory began its career in July, 1943, and the engineering works in 907 September, 1950. It is common ground that these two industries are separate and distinct and that they a... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The same requisition was repeated on March 25, 1953 and April 24, 1953. The appellant disputed the correctness of the view taken by the respondent that the appellant 's factory fell under the purview of the Act, and so, it refused to comply with the respondent 's requisition. Thereupon, the respondent wrote to the appe... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The High Court 908 has rejected this contention. Then it was urged before the High Court on behalf of the appellant that the effect of the notices served on the appellant by the respondent was retrospective in character and it was urged that the said notices were illegal. This argument was also rejected by the High Cou... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The principal point which is sought to be raised by Mr. Pai on behalf of the appellant in this appeal is concluded by a recent decision of this Court in The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Bombay vs (1) Shree Krishna Metal Manufacturing Co., Bhandra, and (2) Oudh Sugar Mills Ltd. (1). It would be noticed that the... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | In the case of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Bombay, (1) this Court has held that section 1 (3) (a) does not lend itself to the construction that it is confined to factories exclusively engaged in any industry specified in Schedule I. It was observed in that connection that when the legislature has describe... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Thus, the conclusion was that in order that a factory should fall under section 1 (3) (a), it must be shown that it is engaged in any such industry as is specified in Sch. I and the number of its employees should not be less than 50. This decision makes it clear that section 1 (3) (a) is not confined only to factories ... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | If the factory carries on one industry which falls under Sch. I and satisfies the requirement as to the number of employees prescribed by the section, it clearly falls under section 1 (3) (a). If the factory carries on more than one industry all of which fell under Sch. 1 and its numerical strengh satisfies the test pr... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | I, the fact that the subsidiary industries do not fall under Sch. I will not help to exclude the application of section 1 (3) (a). If the dominant and primary industry does not fall under Sch. 1, but one or more subsidiary, incidental, minor and feeding industries fall under Sch. I, then section 1 (3) (a) will not appl... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The question about the subsidiary, minor, or feeding industries can legitimately arise only where it is shown that the factory is really started for the purpose of running one primary industry and has undertaken other subsidiary industries only for the purpose of subserving and feeding the purposes and objects of the p... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | I was independent of the other industries conducted by the Company, and so, it was held that the question about one industry being subsidiary, minor, or incidental did not arise. In the result, the Company 's factory was found to fall under section 1 (3) (a). On the other hand, the case of the Oudh Sugar Mills stood on... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Evidence, however, showed that the fabrication of the containers had been undertaken by the Mills only as a feeder activity which was integrally connected with its primary business of producing and marketing vegetable oil, and since the primary business was. outside Sch. 1, the factory as a whole was held to be outside... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Mr. Pai attempted to argue that though engineering industry run by the appellant 's factory falls under Sch. I,it employs only 24 workers whereas the tiles industry employs more than 50. He also relied on that fact that the tiles factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950, and his argument was that j... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | I, it becomes a composite factory to which section 1 (3) (a) applies. When section 1 (3) (a) requires that the factory should be engaged in any industry specified in Sch. I, considerations as to whether the industrial activity is major or minor can arise only where some activities are dominant and others are of the nat... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | 48 of 1962. Section 6 of the unamended Act provides, inter alia, that the contribution to be paid by the employer to the fund shall be 6 1/4% of the basic wages, dearness allowance and retaining allowance, if any, for the time being payable to each of the employees, and the employees ' contribution shall be equal to th... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | We ought to add that Mr. Pai conceded that subsequent to the decision of the appellant 's writ petition in the High Court, the tiles industry has also been included in Sch. I. but the revised rate has been made applicable to it. Mr. Pai contends that if the factory is treated as falling under section 1 (3) (1), a disti... | The appellant runs a tile factory and an engineering works at Quilon. These two industries are indepedent of each other, but they arc carried on by the same company and on the same premises. The tile factory was started in 1943 and the engineering works in 1950. The engineering industry was included in Schedule I of th... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | ivil Appeal No. 2041 of 1972. From the Judgment and Decree dated 5.11.1971 of the Gujarat High Court in First Appeal No. 693 of 1964. Harish N. Salve, S.A. Shroff, S.S. Shardul and R. Sasi prabhu for the Appellant. S.T. | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Desai and M.N. Shroff for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SEN, J. This appeal on certificate brought from the judgment and order of the High Court of Gujarat dated July 3, 1972 raises a question whether the High Court was justi fied in reversing the decision of the District Judge, Suren drana... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 was extended to the Saurashtra region including the area that formed part of the erstwhile State of Patadi in the year 1952. In Patadi, which was the seat of the former Ruler, there exist two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir or Haveli which is the main temple and adjacent to ... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The two temples were exempted from payment of municipal as well as other taxes including the land revenue presumably because they were public tem ples. This is one of the decisive factors in determining whether a temple is a private or a public one. It appears that the management of the temples remained throughout with... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | made by the general public and members of the Vaishnava sect were kept in a golak at Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir under the exclusive control of the Vaishnava sect and remittances were made to Goswami Maharaj, Acharya of the Vaishnava sect at Ahmedabad. Even after the Act was extended to the erstwhile State of Patadi, the ... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | During the inquiry, several wit nesses were examined on behalf of the public as well as by the appellant. The appellant however did not enter the witness box but examined his chief darbari NatwarIal Ranch hodlal. The Deputy Charity Commissioner by his order dated January 29, 1960 on the totality of the evidence came to... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | He held that the question as to whether the temples in question were dedicated to the public depends upon inferences which could legitimately be drawn from facts not in 915 dispute and observed that a dedication to the public may be inferred from a long course of conduct of the founders and descendants. However, it was... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | ** ** ** "There is nothing on record to indicate that in the long past in Patadi, any ruler had put any restriction on the use of the temples for Darshan over a fairly long period during which the members of the public have visited the temples as if they were their temples and this establishes their right. Such a consi... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | And (2) The cash offerings or bhents, gifts of ornaments etc. On consideration of the evidence in the case, particularly the two circumstances adverted to read in conjunction with the evidence as to the way in which the temple endowments had been dealt with and the evidence as to the public user of the temples, the Hig... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It is well known that in the princely regimes, a citizen would not ordinarily interfere with the management of such properties being made by the then Ruler. His evidence that the darbar if it thinks fit can obstruct any person from entering into the temples introduced in the examination in chief is not dependable. He h... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | ** ** ** "The mere fact that the successive Darbars of the rulers were the managers of the temples would not go to show that the temples were private trust properties. The circumstances aforesaid lead to a reasonable inference that although the origin of the temples was at the instance of 918 then Ruler of the Patadi S... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | (3) The High Court was in error in holding that the temples were constructed by the appellant 's ancestor for the benefit of the community at large and that the general public or a particular section thereof, had an unrestricted right of worship at the temples merely because of the circumstance that there was proof of ... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | As to the first, there is very strong and clear evidence to establish that there was dedi cation of the temples by the appellant 's ancestor for the use or benefit of the public. "Endowment" is dedication of property for purposes of religion or charity having both the subject and object certain and capable of ascertain... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Dedication need not always be in writing and can be inferred from the facts and circumstances appearing. It would be a legitimate inference to draw that the founder of the temple had dedicated it to the public if it is found that he had held out the temple to be a public one: Pujari Lakshmana Goundan vs Subramania Ayya... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The finding reached by the High Court and the Charity Commissioner that the temples were places of public religious worship within the meaning of section 2(17) read with section 2(13) of the Act is not vitiated by displacing of that burden but the finding reached by them is based on a proper appreciation of the evidenc... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Such an inference was strengthened by the fact of user of the temples by the public or a section thereof, as of right for over a century. The general effect of the evidence is that the appellant as well as his predecessors although in management, had throughout treated the temples as public temples of which they were m... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | In a public endowment the dedication is for the use or benefit of the public. The essential distinction between a public and a private endowment is that in the former the beneficial interest is vested in an uncertain and a fluctuating body of persons, either the public at large or some considerable portion of it answer... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | When property is dedicated for the worship of a family idol, it is a private and not a public endowment, as the members who are entitled to worship at the shrine of the deity can only be the members of the family i.e. an ascertained group of individuals. But where the beneficiaries are not the members of a family or sp... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Although the temple was a private temple, the evi dence disclosed that the Pujari Lakshmana Goundan, the founder of the temple had held out and represented to the Hindu public in general that the temple was a public temple at which all Hindus might worship. Sir John Edge, in deliv ering the judgment of the Privy Counci... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The cardinal point to be decided is whether it was the intention of the founder that specified indi viduals are to have the right of worship at the shrine, or the general public or any specified portion thereof." The learned Judge distinguished the decision of the Privy Council in Babu Bhagwan Din vs Gir Har Saroop, (s... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | the fact that the idol is installed not within the precincts of residential quarters but in a separate building constructed for that purpose on a vacant site, the installation of the idols within the temple precincts, the performance of pooja by an archaka appointed from time to time for the purpose, the construction o... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | In such a case, the temple would clearly be a public temple." "Where evidence in regard to the foundation of the temple is not clearly avail able, sometimes, judicial decisions rely on certain other facts which are treated as relevant. Is the temple built in such an imposing manner that it may prima facie appear to be ... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | Are the members of the public entitled to take part in the festivals and ceremonies arranged in the temple? Are their offerings accepted as a matter of right?" It was then laid down that the participation of the members of the public in the Darshan in the temple and in the daily acts of worship or in the celebrations o... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | vs Commissioner of Hindu Religious Endowments, Orissa, ; ; Hari Bhanu Maharaj ofBaroda vs Charity Commissioner, Ahmedabad, [1986] 4 SCC.162 and Heir of deceased Maharaj Purshottamlalji Maha raj, Junagad vs Collector of Junagad District & Ors., ; We have carefully gone through the evidence of the witnesses examined by t... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The underlying fallacy in the judgment of the learned District Judge is that he proceeds on the assumption that there was no dedication of the temples express or implied by the founder for the benefit or use of the pub lic. Several circumstances are brought out by the Charity Commissioner and the High Court showing tha... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | It was an undisputed fact that separate accounts being maintained in respect of the income and expenditure of the temples i.e. the cash offerings, gifts of ornaments etc.were not intermingled with the monies belonging to the appellant or the members of the royal family and the incomes from the temples were utilised for... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | The temples though adjacent to the Darbargadh were not in the precincts of the palace but were constructed facing a public road allowing access to the general public. All these cir cumstances clearly support the finding reached by the Chari ty Commissioner and the High Court that the temples were public temples and the... | At Patadi in the erstwhile State of Patadi in the Sau rashtra region of Gujarat State there were two temples known as Sri Dwarkadhishji Mandir and Sri Trikamrayji Mandir, which were constructed in the years 1872 and 1875 respec tively by the then ruler with funds from the State Treasury. In the Gram Panchayat records t... |
What is the summary of this judgment? | N: Criminal Appeal No. 105 of 1978 with W.P. No. 833 of 1978. (Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and order dt. 27.9.77 of the Gujarat High Court in Criminal Spl. | The appellant was detained under the in September, 1974 but was released in December, 1974. In February, 1977 he was detained under section 3(1) of the, on the ground that he was "likely to engage in transporting smuggled goods". One of the grounds of.detention stated: "you were an associate of a notorious smuggler, th... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.