High CourtsDivision Bench(1910) 07 MAD CK 0003

Sundaram Iyer and Another vs Venkateswara Iyer and Others

Madras High Court · Decided on 20 July 1910 · Citation: 7 Ind. Cas. 391

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ralph Benson, J · Krishnaswamy Aiyar, 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

6 paragraphs · 139 words
1.

This suit is to remove defendants Nos. 1 and 2 from the offices of Kishi and Pattola of a village Devasom. The plaintiffs are some of the

Urallars. Defendants Nos. 5 to 33 are the other urallars of the temple. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 had no hereditary right. They are liable to be

removed by the urallars. The plaintiffs are only a small minority of the whole body. They took no steps to remove them and they did not consult the

other urallars It is not alleged that the trustees defendants are acting in collusion with the Kishi and Pattola. The plaintiffs cannot throw upon the

Court the duty which lay on them; Srinivasaswami v. Ramanuia Chariar 22 M. 117.

2.

On this short ground, the suit fails and the second appeal must be dismissed with costs.