AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 122 words
1.
In our view the District Court had no authority u/s 84(2) of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Act to direct a remand and re-hearing of
the case. The powers conferred on the Court by that section are only to modify or set aside the decision of the Board and, of course, to dismiss
the application. If the section had meant that the Court was an appellate authority with all the normal powers of an Appellate Court, we should
expect that to have been stated. The District Court''s order is therefore without jurisdiction and we must set it aside and direct that it pass a proper
order in accordance with its powers under the section. Each party will bear his own costs.