Mathamnaya..2

Q: What is the earliest recorded judicial precedent on this particular issue (Mathamnaya) ?

In the case of Shri Madhusudan Parvat of Jyotir matha, the Bombay High Court held,

A: 1.” Mathamnaya on which the Plaintiff (in the lower court) relles is not a work of Shankar Mathamnayas contain traditional ideals and could not have come down from Shankar”. (page 62).

2. “There is no authoritative version of the Mathamnaya and witnesses for the defendant (in the Lower Court) have produced other versions of it which differ in material particulars from those relied upon by the plaintiff “. (page 66).

3. “If there ever was any strict reservation of areas for the Mohunts of the various Maths certain facts proved in the case indicate that the reservation has long been disregarded.” (page 67)

[Shree Madhusudhan Parvat (Shankaracharya of Jyotir Math) Appellant (Defendant in Lower Court) Vs. Shree Madhav Teerth (Shankaracharya of Dwaraka Math) Respondent (Plaintiff in Lower Court).(Vol. XI of the Bombay Law Reporter)

First Appeal No. 45 of 1907, from the decree passed by Chandulal Mathurdas, Esq., First Class Subordinate Judge at Ahmedabad in Civil Suit No, 640 of 1904.

Before the Honourable Mr. Basil Scott, Chief Justice and Hon. Justice Mr. Batchelor November 11, 1908.]