CHAIRMAN MADAPPA versus M. N. MAHANTHADEVARU AND OTHERS

CHAIRMAN MADAPPA versus M. N. MAHANTHADEVARU AND OTHERS

Directions sought and granted by District Judge under paragraphs (11) and (12) of the scheme for sale of cattle and leasing of cultivation rights constituted ordinary administration of trust property and did not require a separate suit under Section 92(1)(f) of CPC; District Judge had jurisdiction under the scheme.

Parties
Appellant: Madappa; Respondent: M. N. Mahanthadevaru
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 October 1965
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Mysore High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Scheme Settlement Under Section 92 CPC, Trust Administration, Jurisdiction of District Judge, Ordinary Administration of Trust Property
Civil Procedure Religious Endowments Scheme Settlement Under Section 92 CPC Trust Administration Jurisdiction of District Judge Ordinary Administration of Trust Property

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Madappa

Appellant

M. N. Mahanthadevaru

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Mysore High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the District Judge had jurisdiction under Section 92(1), clause (f), of the Civil Procedure Code to direct sale of cattle and cultivation rights of muth lands under the scheme provisions
  2. 2 Whether scheme clauses (11) and (12) permitted court directions for ordinary trust administration without separate suit

Ratio Decidendi

Directions sought and granted by District Judge under paragraphs (11) and (12) of the scheme for sale of cattle and leasing of cultivation rights constituted ordinary administration of trust property and did not require a separate suit under Section 92(1)(f) of CPC; District Judge had jurisdiction under the scheme.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs to be paid by appellant personally