TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Privy Council affirms broad scope of sanction for Sri Balaji Sansthan suit</h1> <h3>Raja Anand Rao Versus Ramdas Daduram and Ors.</h3> The Privy Council upheld the validity of the sanction granted by the Deputy Commissioner for the suit involving the Sansthan of Sri Balaji. The Court ... - Issues:1. Interpretation of sanction for instituting a suit under Section 5392. Scope of the suit permitted by the sanction3. Continuation of the suit after the death of one of the original plaintiffs4. Determination of whether the sansthan is a public trust or private propertyAnalysis:1. The case involved a sansthan known as the Sansthan of Sri Balaji, where the Appellant Raja Anand Rao was the hereditary keeper. A suit was filed for the appointment of new trustees and the removal of the Raja. The sanction granted by the Deputy Commissioner allowed the suit to proceed under Section 539, even though the application was primarily for appointing new trustees. The Privy Council held that the sanction was valid as it was within the Deputy Commissioner's power to grant it based on the explanation provided by the applicants.2. The Appellant argued that the sanction was limited to a specific type of suit under Section 539, i.e., appointing new trustees. However, the Privy Council rejected this narrow interpretation, stating that the sanction was not confined to a particular species of suit but allowed for the broader scope of proceedings. Additionally, the suit was deemed to represent the general public interest, enabling it to continue even after the death of one of the original plaintiffs.3. Despite the Appellant's contention, the Privy Council noted that there were concurrent findings regarding whether the sansthan constituted a public trust or was a private matter of the Raja's family. As this determination was considered a question of fact in this case, the Council found no grounds to overturn the lower courts' decisions.4. Ultimately, the Privy Council advised dismissing the appeal based on the reasons outlined, emphasizing the validity of the sanction, the broader scope of the suit permitted, and the factual determination of the nature of the sansthan as either a public trust or private property.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
