High CourtsDivision Bench(1918) 08 MAD CK 0014

Durugamma Poojari Bheemappa vs Durugamma Poojari Timakka

Madras High Court · Decided on 16 August 1918 · Citation: 51 Ind. Cas. 221

HON’BLE JUDGES
William Ayling, J · Krishnan, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 161 words
1.

The question whether a woman can get puja performed in a temple by a proper proxy is now settled by the ruling of the Full Bench in Annaya

Tantri V. Ammaka Hengsu 47 Ind. Cas. 341

2.

The appellant contends that the plaintiff''s choice of proxy must be limited to the other sharers who were entitled to perform puja in their turn.

This was put as a matter of special custom in the plaint temple in the lower Appellate Court, but that Court has found against it and we must accept

the finding.

3.

It is now argued before us that it is a rule of Hindu Law. Cole brook''s Digest, Book II, Chapter III, Section 2, Rule 21, is relied on. We do not

think that rule has anything to do with the choice of proxies at all; nor is it shown to be in force in this Presidency.

4.

The second appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.