Irrumathirumala Nallanchakravarthi ... vs Irumathirumal Nallachakravarthi ... on 30 December, 1967
29. This Court also in Sarwar Lal v. Ram Narayan, to which one of us (the Chief Justice) was a party, had in considering the question whether a `brit' (vrit) i.e., a right to priestly dues or voluntary offerings of the Jujmans (Yajmans disciples) for the funeral rites or ceremonies, is a legal right, a right which has received judicial recognition, or even a right to office or property, held that when the funeral rights are to be performed by the Maha Brahmins of the choice of Yajmans and further when every priest in case of his refusal cannot be perform the same, in other words, when no right is vested either in the plaintiff or in any Maha Brahmins in relation to the performance of these ceremonies, and no corresponding obligation is laid on him, it is difficult to hold that the birt right is a right pertaining to any office. Similarly, it was further held, when the plaintiff cannot exclude the other Maha Brahmins to perform the ceremonies if they are called upon to do so by the persons concerned, it cannot be said to be the property of the plaintiff. The vrit right was accordingly held to be neither a right to an office nor does it constitute property so that it may be deemed to be a civil or legal right to property in relation to which a civil suit may lie.