|
I.A. no. 474 of 2010 in O.S. no … of 2010
Filed under section 92 and section 151 of C.P.C. on 23 August 2010
Petitioners/Plaintiffs
1. Mr. S. Ramanathan
2. Mr. Niranjan Naik
3. Ms. Sudha Singha
4. Mr. Raman Reddy
5. Mr. Sraddhalu Ranade
All give their address as “Sri Aurobindo Ashram, Pondicherry 605002”
Respondents/Defendents
1. Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust
2. Mr. Manoj Das Gupta, Managing Trustee
3. Mr. [should be Dr.] Dilip Kumar Dutta, Trustee
4. Mr. Dilip Mehtani, Trustee
5. Mr. R. Prabhakar, Trustee
6. Mr. Albert Patel, Trustee
Remarks: 2-6 are the five trustees of the Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust. With their petition the plaintiffs, who are members of the Ashram, seek the leave of the court to institute a suit against the Ashram Trust and its Trustees.
Paragraphs 1-3: Reddy introduces himself as petitioner 4 and as an inmate of the Ashram since 1978. He notes that the other four petitioners have been inmates since 2003, 1968, 1996, and 1968.
Remark: the average year of admission to the ashram of the five petitioners is 1982. Four of the five Trustees have been inmates of the ashram since the 1940s or 1950s.
Paragraph 4: Reddy claims that the Trustees, “instead of promoting Sri Aurobindo’s tenets and philosophy … have and continue to harbour, defend and openly extend support to one Mr. Peter Heehs, who authored ‘The Lives of Sri Aurobindo’, a sacrilegious book…” etc. He then gives a dramatized account of a movement against Heehs and his book. He claims that the Trustees refusal to expel Heehs from the Ashram on the advice of himself and various co-conspirators constitutes breach of trust.
Remark: Reddy’s opinion of the book in question is biased and without support. The movement against Heehs was organized by Reddy, Sraddhalu Ranade, and a few others for reasons that are personal and malicious. The book in question has in fact been favourably received by critics and readers, many of whom credit it with having increased their knowledge of and devotion for Sri Aurobindo.
Sacrilege is a Christian concept, and has no equivalent in Indian religion, nor any place in Indian law.
|