IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936 OP(C).No. 2716 of 2014 (O) ---------------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA NO. 2707/14 IN OS NO. 8/12 OF IST ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, THRISSUR ----------------------
PETITIONER :
--------------------------
SREE NARYANA BHAKTHA PARIPALANA YOGAM SREENARAYANAPURAM, KOORKKANCHERY, THRISSUR TALUK REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, M.K.SURYA PRAKASH S/O.KUMARAN, MUNDAPPATTU HOUSE, KANIMANGALAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SMT.DAISY A. PHILIPOSE SRI.JAI GEORGE RESPONDENT(S) :
----------------------------
1. SREE NARYANA BHAKTHA PARIPALANA YOGAM TRUST SREENARAYANAPURAM, KOORKKANCHERY THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, D.RAJENDRAN, S/O.VAILOPPILLY DIVAKARAN-680 005.
2. K.K.BHAGEERATHAN S/O.KUMARAN, KARATTE HOUSE, THRISSUR - 680 007.
3. I.G.PRASANNAN S/O.INIKKAL GOVINDAN, ARISTO ROAD, CHELAKKOTTUKARA THRISSUR - 680 005.
4. K.V. SADANANDAN S/O.KOLLARA VELAYUDHAN, HOTEL INTERNATIONAL CHEMBOTTU LANE, THRISSUR 680 001.
5. K.V.SATHYAN S/O.KOLAZHIKKARAN VELAYUDHAN THOTTATHIL LANE, CHELAKKOTTUKARA THRISSUR -680 005 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT GREEN PARK, NO.D2 FOURTH FLOOR, KOORKKANCHERY P.O., THRISSUR - 680 007.
6. ADV. MADHU B.THOPPIL S/O. BALAN, KANJIRNGADI, KOORKKANCHERY P.O. THRISSUR - 680 007.
...2/-
OP(C).No. 2716 of 2014 (O) -2-
7. RAHULAN K.B., S/O. KUNDUVARAVALAPPIL BALAN SAWMILL ROAD, KOORKKANCHERY P.O. THRISSUR – 680 007.
8. M.G. RAVEENDRAN S/O. MADAMPASSERY GOPALAN SUBHASH NAGAR, BHAGAVATH SINGH LANE KANIMANGALAM P.O., THRISSUR.
9. DR. K.R. PRATHAPAN S/O. KARUMATHRA RAMAN GOSAI KUNNU, KURIYACHIRA P.O., THRISSUR.
R1 BY SENIOR ADVOCATE DR.K.P.SATHEESAN THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn ...3/-
OP(C).No. 2716 of 2014 (O) --------------------------------------
APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE TRUST DEED OF THE IST DEFENDANT TRUST. EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.09.11 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE IST DEFENDANT.
EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS.NO. 8 OF 2012 ON THE FILES OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT-I, THRISSUR.
EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DATED 14.8.12 IN OS.NO.8 OF 2012 ON THE FILES OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT-I, THRISSUR.
EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN FAO.NO. 55 OF 2014.
EXHIBIT P6. COPY OF IA.NO. 2707/14 IN OS.NO. 8 OF 2012 ON THE FILES OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT-I, THRISSUR.
EXHIBIT P7. COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED IN IA.NO.2707/2014 IN OS.NO. 8 OF 2012 ON THE FILES OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT-I, THRISSUR.
EXHIBIT P8. COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA.NO. 2707/14 IN OS.NO. 8 OF 2012 ON THE FILES OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT-I, THRISSUR.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL -------------------------------------------------------------
//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn P.BHAVADASAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P.(C) No. 2716 of 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 03rd day of December, 2014
J U D G M E N T
Under challenge is Ext.P8 order whereby the court below held that the suit was not maintainable for want of sanction under Section 92 of the C.P.C..
2. Before this Court, when the matter was taken up for hearing today, there was a lot of debate regarding the maintainability of the suit. But on facts, it comes out that the last election was conducted on 20.11.2011 and the term of office bears is for three years. That expired on 20.11.2014. If that be so, it may be unnecessary to go into the validity of the election of that body and it will be only in the interest of the trust to have an election conducted in terms of the Ext.A1 bye-law.
3. Dr. K.P. Satheesan, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent pointed out that since the suit has become infructuous, the receivers are to be discharged and O.P.(C) No. 2716 of 2014 -2-
the body which was in office may be directed to conduct the election.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner on the other hand pointed out that since the receivers are continuing in office, it will be only appropriate now to direct them to conduct election so that there may not be any further complication in the matter.
5. After having given anxious consideration to the rival contentions, it is felt that it will be only appropriate to direct that the election due may be conducted strictly in terms of Ext.A1 bye-law by the receivers in office. It is felt that upsetting the present state of affairs may lead to complications.
6. Therefore this Original Petition is disposed of directing the court below to take such steps as are necessary to enable the receivers to hold the election strictly in terms of Ext.A1 bye-law.
O.P.(C) No. 2716 of 2014 -3-
This order will not stand in the way of lower court in disposing of the application filed before it and this order will not preclude either of the parties from proceeding in accordance with law.
Sd/-
P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE ds //True copy// P.A. to Judge O.P.(C) No. 2716 of 2014 -4-
P.BHAVADASAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P.(C) No. 2716 of 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 20th day of November, 2014
O R D E R
The caveator objects to the passing of interim order. Since the suit is dismissed, no order can be granted with reference to the suit. But the learned counsel for the petitioner apprehends that the receivers had been appointed and they may be immediately discharged. There will be an interim stay of discharge of receivers for a period of one week.
Post on 24.11.2014.
P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE ds