https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179050 A prior final adjudication recognising the Dikshitars as a religious denomination and confirming their right to administer the temple was binding inter partes and could not be reopened on later legal arguments; the issue was therefore barred by res judicata. The Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 permitted only limited regulatory control over denominational administration under Article 26 and Section 107, so an Executive Officer could be appointed only within prescribed conditions and for a defined purpose. An indefinite or unconditional takeover could not lawfully supersede denominational management, making the continued executive administration unsustainable. en-us Mon, 06 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 14:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179050 A prior final adjudication recognising the Dikshitars as a religious denomination and confirming their right to administer the temple was binding inter partes and could not be reopened on later legal arguments; the issue was therefore barred by res judicata. The Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 permitted only limited regulatory control over denominational administration under Article 26 and Section 107, so an Executive Officer could be appointed only within prescribed conditions and for a defined purpose. An indefinite or unconditional takeover could not lawfully supersede denominational management, making the continued executive administration unsustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 06 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179050