Question: Is a claim by Swami that he is entitled to be carried in a palanquin on ceremonial occasions a suit of civil nature? Give reasons in support of your answer and also refer to relevant case law, if any, on the point. Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [Is a claim by… Read More »

Question: Is a claim by Swami that he is entitled to be carried in a palanquin on ceremonial occasions a suit of civil nature? Give reasons in support of your answer and also refer to relevant case law, if any, on the point. Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [Is a claim by Swami that he is entitled to be carried in a palanquin on ceremonial occasions a suit of civil nature? Give reasons in support of your answer and also refer to relevant case law, if any, on...

Question: Is a claim by Swami that he is entitled to be carried in a palanquin on ceremonial occasions a suit of civil nature? Give reasons in support of your answer and also refer to relevant case law, if any, on the point.

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [Is a claim by Swami that he is entitled to be carried in a palanquin on ceremonial occasions a suit of civil nature? Give reasons in support of your answer and also refer to relevant case law, if any, on the point.]

Answer

No, a claim by a Swami that he is entitled to be carried in a palanquin on ceremonial ‘occasions is not a suit of civil nature-Andaniswami v. Totadswami (1921) 23 BOMLR 75.

The facts of this problem are similar to the facts of the famous case of Andaniswami v. Totadswami referred above. In this case, it was held that a claim by a Swami to be carried on in palanquin on certain occasions is not suit of a civil nature as it involves the question of mere dignity or honour of a person and does not involve the question of enforcement of any civil right or obligation. The court observed-

“The present suit is not for a claim to an office, but for a claim to a mere honour and dignity on account of an office and is, I think, not maintainable in a Civil Court. It has been held that the claim by a Swami or arch-priest that he is entitled to be carried on a high road in a cross-palanquin will not be entertained by a civil Court.

What is claimed in such a suit is a mere honour and dignity, a mark attached to the office of a Swami. It has been laid down that civil Courts should discourage, as far as possible, claims of so unsubstantial and objectionable a nature and they ought not to be involved in the determination of trivial questions of dignity and privilege although connected with an office.”

In view of the decision given by the court in Andhuni Swami’s case, it is clear that in the given case a claim by a Swami that he is entitled to be carried in a palanquin on ceremonial occasions is not a suit of civil nature because it involves only a question of mere dignity or honour of a person and does not involve the question of enforcement of any civil right or obligation.


Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

  1. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – I of X
  2. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – II of X
  3. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – III of X
  4. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – IV of X
  5. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – V of X
  6. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VI of X
  7. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VII of X
  8. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VIII of X
  9. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – IX of X
  10. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – X of X
Updated On 2021-11-27T03:24:54+05:30
Admin LB

Admin LB

Next Story