Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.21 seconds)
Mahant Som Giri vs Mahant Ram Ratan Giri And Ors. on 26 August, 1941 cites

Babu Mahadeo Prasad Singh vs Karia Bharati on 18 December, 1934

21. Before concluding this judgment, we may observe that Som Giri has been the de facto mahant from the year 1936 and Krishnanand has never upto this date appeared on the scene and claimed to replace Som Giri. [There is no suggestion that the decretal amount if realised by Som Giri will be lost (to the trust. Indeed the suit is in the interest of the trust. Som Giri was therefore entitled to bring the suit : vide Mahadeo Prasad Singh v. Karia Bharthi ('35) 22 A.I.R. 1935 P.c. 44. For the reasons given above, we allow this appeal, set aside the decree of the Court below and decree the plaintiff's suit with costs here and below.
Bombay High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 40 - Full Document

Chhotey Lal vs Sri Thakur Gopalji And Ors. on 21 December, 1939

Indeed he has taken no interest whatsoever in the affairs of the 'math' during all these years and has to all intents and purposes abdicated the 'gaddi.' Shib Dayal as the sole surviving trustee instituted the suit in his own name. This, as observed by the Court below, he did in the interest of the trust. During the pendency of the suit, the first appeal from order referred to above was decided by this Court, and then Shib Dayal was faced with an awkward situation. He found that as a result of that decision he had no right to maintain the suit. The only alternative that was left to him was to act in accordance with the pronouncement of this Court and he acted in conformity with that pronouncement. He removed Krishnanand from the mahantship and appointed Som Giri as mahant and then applied for the substitution of the name of Som Giri as plaintiff.
Allahabad High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1