Nithyananda gets relief in Madurai Aadheenam case

Justice M V Muralidharan rejected the suit on citing Section 59 of HR&CE Act, 1959, wherein a suit must be filed either by the Commissioner of the HR&CE department or by two or more persons having interest and having obtained the written consent of the Commissioner.

The judge in his order said, “Section 59 of the HR & CE Act, 1959, being a protective measure, to shield a religious math from unjustified and underhanded litigations, this court finds that the above provision cannot be overlooked or disregarded and consequently finds the plaint (83 of 2012) on hand is liable to be rejected for want of compliance with the said law.”

The judge also said: “Coming to the case on hand even though the first respondent (Manivasagam) contends to be a practicing advocate and received Samaya Dheeksha (Religious initiation) as per agama tradition and the second respondent (Sami Thiagarajan) as a devout Tamil Saivatie and by virtue of the same they have filed the above suit, there is nothing on record to substantiate their claim and put on display that they were either disciples of the Mutt or individuals adhering to system of religious belief propounded by Madurai Adheenam Mutt.”