AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Newsam, J.—I do not see why respondents 2 to 4 should be removed from the record. u/s 84 of the Hindu Religious Endowments Act the
trustee of Sri Maleswaraswami Temple in Guntur town moved the Board to declare the temple an excepted temple. The Board issued notice to all
persons interested. The three present petitioners came forward and successfully opposed the trustee''s application. The Board held that the temple
was non-excepted.
The trustee moved the District Court u/s 84(2) of the Act to set aside that order and made the present petitioners respondents to his petition.
A question seems to have arisen in the District Court as to whether the petitioners were necessary parties and the learned District Judge has held
that they are not, on the grounds that no relief is asked for against them and the Board may be trusted to support its own order.
I am of opinion that since petitioners were proper parties in the petition u/s 84 before the Board, they are proper though perhaps not necessary
parties to the application before the District Judge u/s 84(2).
I allow this petition. There will be no order as to costs.