binding on the plaintiffs or any of the properties, temples, Maths, lands and buildings belonging to the said Sree Chaitanya Math or its branches ... management and administration of the plaintiff No. 1 all its Temples, Maths, lands buildings and other properties and affairs including the said Sri Chaitanya Research
management and administration of [he plaintiff No. 1, all its temples. Maths, lands, buildings and other properties and offices including the said Sri Chaitanya Research ... custody and possession of the plaintiff No. 1 and its temples. Maths, lands, buildings, properties, assets and offices including the said Sri Chaitanya Research Institute
custody, management and administration of the said society, all its temples, maths, lands, buildings and other properties and affairs including Sree Chaitanya Research Institute ... interest in respect of the plaintiff No. 1 or its temples, maths, lands and buildings or in the said Sree Chaitanya Research Institute
management and administration of plaintiff No. 1 and of its temples, maths, lands and buildings and other properties and affairs including the said Srichaitanya Research ... administration, custody and possession of plaintiff No. 1 and its temple, maths, lands and buildings, properties assets etc. including the said Srichaitanya Research Institute
suit was instituted by the head of a Math to recover possession of land which formed part of an endowment of a Hindu temple, from
land within the meaning of Clause 12 of the Letters Patent although the grant of such relief may indirectly affect the land. If, however ... title or possession control or management of land, the suit will be a suit for land within the meaning of Clause
lands in suits to the predecessor-in-interest of the pltf about 200 years ago. The pltf is the Mohant of a 'Math ... grant to the original Mohant of the Math. The pltf further alleges that all the lands appertain to the 'Mal' assets
Mayapore Shri Chaitanya Math & Ors. (supra)
the suit was not for specific performance of an agreement for sale of land,
but for cancellation ... directly
operate on the land."
In Tridandeeswami Bhakti Kusum Sraman Maharaj & Ors. vs.
Mayapore Shree Chaitanya Math & Ors. (supra), a Division Bench
from the facts found that one Dwarka Math Roy admittedly had a mokarari interest in the land in question
suit for dissolution of the firm as it is a suit for land. After referring to the judgment of Supreme Court in Addanki Narayanappa ... land even if its assets consist of immovable properties."
34. In Tridandeeswami Bhakti Kusum Sraman Maharaj v. Mayapore Sree Chaitanya Math, , M.M. Dutt
