Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.31 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
R. Vaidyanatha Ayyar vs Swaminatha Ayyar on 19 June, 1924
It is not necessary to refer to other
opinions expressed by the learned Judges in that case in
view of the decision of their Lordships of the Privy Council
in Vaidyanatha Ayyar and another v. Swaminatha Ayyar and
Another(2), where they approved the opinion expressed by Sir
John Wallis, C.J., in the case cited above, and held : "They
agree with Sir John Wallis that the bare possibility,
however remote, that a Hindu might desire to resort to a
particular temple gives him an interest in the trust appears
to defeat the object with which the Legislature inserted
these words in the section. The object was to prevent
people interfering by virtue of this section in the ad-
ministration of charitable trusts merely in the interests of
others and Without any real interests of their own."
Agreeing with the view expressed by the Privy Council, we
hold that in the present case the plaintiffs/respondents,
who were merely Lambardars and residents of village
Jhandawala, had, in those capacities, no such interest as
could entitle them to institute this suit.
Hem Singh vs Mahant Basant Das on 23 January, 1936
Further, in this case, there was material showing that this
institution at Jhandawala was registered as one of the
branches of the principal institution of Nirmala Sadhus
known as the Panchayati Akhara situated at Kankhal near
Hardwar. There was further evidence showing that in this
institution the worship is primarily of a Samadh which is
against all tenets of the Sikh religion. Nirmala Sadhus, it
appears, as a class worship at Samadhs which goes to show
that they can no longer be regarded as people following the
Sikh religion. In their beliefs and practices, the Nirmala
Sadhus are now quite akin to Udasis, and there is a series
of-cases which has laid down that members of the Udasi sect
are not Sikhs. We need only mention the view expressed by
the Privy Council in Hem Singh and Others v. Basant Das.
1