PALANIYANDI PANDARAM Vs. PALANIAPPA THEVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first contention of petitioners (Palaniandi Pandaram and others) is that the dispute between the parties is not one falling within the purview of either Section 145 or Section 147 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Joint Magistrate has omitted to specify the provision of law under which his order is passed: but the dispute is described as follows: "a dispute...concerning the management of Selva Vinayagar Temple and the lands attached thereto...and with regard to the performance of puja in that temple."

(2.) The dispute regarding the lands undoubtedly comes under Section 145 and petitioners Vakil does not now seek to attack the Order so far as it relates to the lands.

(3.) There remains the question of the management of the temple and the performance of puja therein.