Month: April 2017

Admitted facts—Need not be proved—The Court was entitled to draw an inference that the same had been admitted. Partition—Family settlement—Not given its full effect—Finding that by purported settlement deed, joint family property had not been partitioned by meets and bounds—Finding held to be proper.

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1651 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Civil Appeal No. 7061 of…

You missed

Temple Bye Laws — Oachira Parabrahma Temple — Ancient structure without a building or deity, governed by Bye-laws with three-tier elected committees — Appellants, elected Secretary and President, challenged two High Court orders (2020 and 2023) that removed their committee and appointed an unelected one under an Administrative Head, citing violations of the temple’s Bye-laws and customs —Legality of appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one contrary to the temple’s Bye-laws — Petitioner argues that the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction and violated the temple’s governance structure by appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one without proper legal basis — The High Court’s actions were necessary for the efficient administration of the temple until a scheme could be framed and new elections held — The Supreme Court modified the High Court orders, appointing a new retired Judge as Administrative Head to conduct fair elections within four months, while directing all parties to cooperate — The Court emphasized the need to preserve temple properties and governance as per established customs and laws — The Supreme Court struck down the High Court’s order appointing an unelected committee, appointed a new Administrative Head to conduct elections, and directed all parties to cooperate, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the temple’s established governance structure and Bye-laws.