Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.20 seconds)
M/S. Thomas Educatioal & Charitable ... vs Arulmigu Ekambaranathar Thirukoil on 28 March, 2011 cites

Sri Arthanareeswarar Of Tiruchengode ... vs T.M. Muthuswamy Padayachi, M. ... on 5 August, 2002

12. We could also see that the defendants in C.S.No.769/2001, a suit filed by the respondent against the other tenants was sought to be rejected, on their application and the same was dismissed by the learned Single Judge and against which the appeal was preferred in O.S.A.No.84 of 2005 and the same documents were considered by the Division Bench and it had come to the conclusion that the power given by the Commissioner to the Executive Officer under Section 45(3) of the Act empowers the Executive Officer through his order dated 10.7.1995 would be sufficient to maintain the suit. It was also decided that the Board of Trustees can delegate the power in favour of the Executive Officer to file any suit on their behalf. On going through the unreported judgment of this Court made in O.S.A.No.84 of 2005, we are entirely in agreement with the judgment and hold that the facts and circumstances discussed in the judgment of this Court reported in 2003 (1) L.W. 386 (Sri Arthanareeswarar of Tiruchengode v. T.M.Muthuswamy Padayachi, etc. & others) are different. In the light of the facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the suit filed by the temple represented by the Executive Officer is maintainable in law and accordingly, the order of the learned Judge on this score is sustainable in law. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the suit filed by the Executive Officer on behalf of the temple is in order.
Madras High Court Cites 38 - Cited by 41 - Full Document
1