Click the Play button to listen to article

The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea filed by Raghavendra Thirtha Swami challenging a Kerala High Court ruling that allowed his rival, Srimad Samyamindra Thirtha Swamiji, to continue proceedings seeking possession of the Kashi Math Samsthan's deities and other articles from him.

A bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi dismissed Raghavendra's plea at the admission stage, holding that there was no good ground to entertain it.

“We do not find any good ground to entertain this petition. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed”, the Court said.

The dispute arose from a prolonged legal battle between two pontiffs of the Kashi Math Samsthan. In 2000, Raghavendra Thirtha Swami filed a suit before the District Court, Tirupati, seeking a declaration that he was the 21st Matadhipathi of the Math and a permanent injunction restraining his Guru, Srimad Sudhindra Thirtha Swami, from interfering with its affairs.

The suit was dismissed, while a counterclaim by the Guru was decreed in 2009. The decree restrained Raghavendra Thirtha Swami from interfering in the administration of the Math and directed him to hand over deities and other articles belonging to the Samsthan. The decree was affirmed in appeals.

The decree has been under execution since 2011. After Raghavendra objected to execution at Tirupati, the decree was transferred to the Ernakulam court. His subsequent objections to the jurisdiction of the Ernakulam court and to the executability of the decree were rejected by the Kerala High Court.

Raghvendra's rival Sudhindra died at Haridwar in January 2017.

Respondents Samyamindra, whom Sudhindra had nominated as his successor, sought to continue the proceedings on the strength of a Sudhindra's registered Will executed in 2003 and a proclamation issued in 2015. He moved the Ernakulam court to be brought on record as the decree-holder.

The Ernakulam court rejected the application in 2019, holding that Samyamindra first had to approach the Tirupati court, which had passed the original decree, and obtain an order substituting him as decree-holder.

The Kerala High Court overturned that decision in August this year.

The High Court held that Samyamindra could directly continue the proceedings before the Ernakulam executing court under Section 146 CPC read with the Explanation to Order XXI Rule 16.

Section 146 CPC enables a person who has acquired the rights of a party to continue the proceedings.

Under Order XXI Rule 16 CPC, a person who claims the right to execute a decree through the original decree-holder has to approach the court that passed the decree and establish that right.

Explanation to Order XXI Rule 16 provides that a transferee of rights in property that is the subject matter of the suit can apply for execution without a separate assignment of the decree.

The High Court held that prior substitution before the court which passed the decree was not necessary where there was a devolution or assignment of interest in the property covered by the decree, rather than an assignment of the decree itself.

Raghavendra challenged that ruling before the Supreme Court, arguing that Section 146 was only an enabling provision, and the procedure under Order XXI Rule 16 could not be bypassed. He also contended that succession by operation of law or through a Will would still require the successor to approach the court which passed the decree.

The Supreme Court has now declined to interfere with the Kerala High Court's ruling.

Appearance –

For Petitioner: Mr. P.B.Krishnan, Sr. Adv. Mr. B.Ragunath, Adv. Ms. Anila T Thomas, Adv. Mr. Venkataraman R., AOR

For Respondent: Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Lakshmeesh S. Kamath, AOR Ms. Samriti Ahuja, Adv. Ms. Aditi Prakash, Adv. Ms. Anushka Singhal, Adv. Mr. Ashwin, Adv. Mr. Shubhansh, Adv.

Case no. – Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 31313/2026

Case Title – Raghavendra Thirtha Swami v. Srimad Samyamindra Thirtha Swamiji

Tags: