Karnataka High Court
LEGAL SUBJECT
Religious and Personal Law
Judgment analyses where this is the main or secondary subject.Latest analyses
30 ARTICLES
Karnataka High Court
Ministerial instructions cannot confer substantive entitlement to a temple Archaka office.
The petitions concerned entitlement to perform Archaka duties at the main Sannidhi of Sri Cheluvanarayana Swamy Temple, Melkote, and a separate challenge to the exoneration of Narasaraja Bhattar in a domestic enquiry...3 MIN READ↗
Karnataka High Court
Ministerial instructions cannot confer substantive entitlement to a temple Archaka office.
The petitions concerned entitlement to perform Archaka duties at the main Sannidhi of Sri Cheluvanarayana Swamy Temple, Melkote, and a separate challenge to the exoneration of Narasaraja Bhattar in a domestic enquiry...3 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
The earlier order’s observations continue to operate following the temple’s unlocking.
Both petitions under Article 226 concerned the locking of Arasalwar Pillaiyar Temple, Theppakulatheru, Tiruchendur.1 MIN READ↗
Karnataka High Court
Ministerial instructions cannot confer substantive entitlement to a temple Archaka office.
The petitions concerned entitlement to perform Archaka duties at the main Sannidhi of Sri Cheluvanarayana Swamy Temple, Melkote, and a separate challenge to the exoneration of Narasaraja Bhattar in a domestic enquiry...3 MIN READ↗
Himachal Pradesh High Court
A personal deity lacking historical recognition has no automatic right to festival invitations or facilities.
The petitioner challenged the Deputy Commissioner, Kullu’s order dated 10 January 2025 rejecting its representation seeking an invitation and facilities at the Kullu Dussehra festival.2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
A fit person may administer the endowment pending determination of competing hereditary trusteeship claims.
The petitioners challenged two orders dated 13 April 2026 made by the Commissioner in R.P.No.561 of 2025: one allowing D. Murugan to be impleaded as a respondent, and the other not extending an interim stay against th...2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
The Festival Idol Must Be Placed at the Customary Thinnai Before Being Taken to the Temple.
The petitioner sought a direction permitting the conduct of the annual festival’s initial puja (Mudhal Poojai) at Arulmigu Periya Muthaalamman Temple in accordance with previous practice.2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
An agreed procession route is permitted ad hoc, leaving future customary rights undecided.
The petitioner, the Chief Executive Officer and General Power of Attorney of the 46th Jeer of Sri Ahobila Mutt, sought permission to conduct a procession through Arulmigu Nachiyar (Andal) Thirukovil, Srivilliputhur, o...2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Repeated reunion efforts undermine proof of animus deserendi, essential to establishing desertion.
The parties married on 2 February 2006 and had a son, born on 1 February 2007. They later began living separately.2 MIN READ↗
Calcutta High Court
Hindu Succession Act overrides Manki estate’s primogeniture custom, Calcutta High Court rules in inheritance dispute
The respondent-plaintiff claimed a half share in the Mankiary Estate, asserting that succession to the estate was governed by primogeniture and that the settlement records had wrongly recorded the estate in the name o...2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Police must protect temple rituals authorized by subsisting HR&CE orders without adjudicating customary rights.
The petitioner and the fourth respondent are brothers whose family had traditionally performed rituals at Arulmigu Periya Muthalamman Temple during its annual festival.2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Priest’s post-ordination deposits belong to his religious society, not family heirs, Madras High Court rules
Rev. Fr. Deivakumar Arulanantham joined the appellant religious society and was ordained a priest in 1989.3 MIN READ↗
Chhattisgarh High Court
Scheduled Tribe succession follows proved custom or applicable statutory law, not the Hindu Succession Act.
The dispute concerned agricultural land originally belonging to Biju Gond and later recorded in the name of Dukhiya Bai, widow of Biju’s son Manher.3 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Police protection is limited to enabling the petitioner to perform customary worship.
The petitioner sought police protection to perform customary worship at Sri Pappathi Amman, Sri Perumal and Sri Veerakaran Temples in S.F. No. 73, Agaraharam Thazhaiyur Village, claiming that he belonged to the third...2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Temple management disputes cannot defeat worshippers’ right to participate in festivals.
The petitioners claimed to be members of the committee managing an ancient temple dedicated to Arulmigu Sri Mariyamman and Arulmigu Sri Maha Muniyappan at Sellipalayam.2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
ASI withdraws cooking ban for Thiruparankundram hill festival; Madras HC directs police to ensure peaceful celebrations
The petitions concerned the Malai Mel Kumarar festival at Thiruparankundram, scheduled for 9 October 2026.2 MIN READ↗
Supreme Court
Hindu widow’s limited agricultural-land interest became absolute under 1956 Succession Act, Supreme Court rules
Khajano held the disputed agricultural land and was declared a Bhumidhar under the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 (“DLR Act”).2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Madras High Court permits widow of murder accused to hold death-anniversary rites under strict police conditions
The petitioner sought permission to hold first-death-anniversary and customary funeral observances for her late husband, P. Nagendran, who had been an accused in a sensational murder case; her son was also an accused2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Section 43 feeds a transfer when the transferor later acquires the transferred share.
The suit property had been settled on Visalatchi Ammal by her husband under a 1949 settlement deed, which gave her a life interest and provided for the property to pass to her children after her death.3 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Temple Must Tie the Mavilai, While Both Factions May Conduct Horse Processions.
The petitioner, President of the Rajakula Agamudayar Community, sought directions concerning arrangements for the Purattasi festival at Arulmigu Pattalamman Muthiahswamy Temple, scheduled for 12–14 October 2026.2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Separate festival permission was rightly denied absent evidence of exclusion or caste-based discrimination.
The petitioner, a member of the Devendrakula Velalar community, sought permission for himself and 13 other families to celebrate the Sri Arulmigu Singakkudi Amman Temple festival separately, alleging that they had bee...2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Madras HC upholds rejection of Zen trust’s FCRA application, says applicants must disclose their religious character and have no right to foreign funding
The appellant trust, founded in 2021 and registered under Sections 12AB and 80G of the Income Tax Act, applied for FCRA registration.3 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Temple festival adal padal program permitted subject to safeguards and a 10 p.m. cutoff.
The petitioner challenged the second respondent’s order dated 3 October 2026 rejecting his request to conduct an Adal Padal programme during the Arulmighu Shri Ayyanar Swamy and Shri Alagunachi Amman Temple Festival a...1 MIN READ↗
Karnataka High Court
Maintenance arrears alone do not warrant denial of parental visitation rights.
The wife filed M.C. No. 18/2020 seeking divorce under Sections 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.3 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
A peace committee may facilitate temple disputes, but any settlement cannot bind the parties.
The petitioner sought a direction under Article 226 for the authorities to consider his representation and convene a peace committee meeting concerning the customary selection of a poosari for Arulmigu Nallathangal Ko...2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
An RDO’s order cannot itself establish HR&CE’s right to administer a temple.
The petitioner challenged an order dated 2 October 2026 of the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Tiruchendur, concerning the Arasalvar Temple near Tiruchendur.2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Police must enforce agreed worship schedules and provide protection during temple festivals.
The petitioner sought police protection for the Arulmigu Selliyamman Temple festival at Palakkapatti, scheduled for 6–8 October 2026, citing a risk of confrontation between two groups over worship arrangements.2 MIN READ↗
Karnataka High Court
A Deputy Commissioner authorised under Section 43(6) cannot further delegate the statutory enquiry.
Devotees complained of disorganised management, disputes over the Temple’s administration, and concerns about the use of its funds.2 MIN READ↗
Madras High Court
Authorities must facilitate temple-festival peace while preserving devotees’ right to worship.
The petitioner sought a mandamus directing the authorities to permit Polakkapatti villagers to hold the traditional Mandhai Amman Temple festival at Survey No. 56/2, relying on a representation dated 10 September 2026.2 MIN READ↗No articles match these filters.