IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 28TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4890 of 2010(O) ------------------------------------ ORDER DTD. 27.1.2010 IN IS. 374/2010 IN OS.368/2008 of PRL.M.C.,KOZHIKODE-II .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- DR.KUNHI AHAMMED KUTTY, S/O.KUNHI MOIDEEN KUTTY HAJI, THIRIKKOTT VEEDU, V.K.K.MENON ROAD, PANNIYANKARA AMSOM AND DESOM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. K.P.MUHAMMED, S/O.MOIDEEN KUNJU, DHANIYA, CHEVAYOOR AMSOM DESOM, CHEVAYOOR.P.O, CALICUT-17. 2. P.AHAMED KOYA, S/O.ABDURAHIMANKUTTY, 17/1057, AMAN, KASABA AMSOM DESOM, PUTHIYARA.P.O, CALICUT-04. 3. DR.C.P.ABOOBACKER, S/O.AYAMMED KUTTY, SHAMSUL KHAIR, POONGOTTUKULAM, TIRUR.P.O, MALAPPURAM. 4. N.T.MOHAMMEDALI, DAYA MANZIL, KACHERIPADI, VENGAR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 304. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss P.BHAVADASAN, J. ------------------------------------- WP(C) No.4890 of 2010-O ------------------------------------- Dated 17th February 2010 Judgment In this Writ Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner assails Ext.P9 order passed by the Principal Munsiff's Court-II, Kozhikode and seeks to have it quashed. 2. The petitioner is the President of the Executive Committee of a registered society, namely, Association for Welfare of the Handicapped, Kozhikode. In the election held in 2005, the petitioner was elected as the President and the first respondent as the Secretary of the said Society. It appears that some difference of opinion arose between the first respondent and the petitioner, which led to a dual election for constitution of the executive committee. Ultimately, the petitioner along with another, filed OS No.368/08 before the Munsiff's Court-II, Kozhikode, praying for multiple declarations and WPC 4890/10 2 consequential injunctions. The Court below disposed of the suit by Ext.P4 Judgment dated 23.12.2009. Aggrieved by the Judgment and decree, the matter was carried in appeal. It is stated that the Appellate Court by Ext.P6 order, has granted stay of operation of the Judgment and decree of the Trial Court. The relevant portion of Ext.P6 order reads as follows : “In the circumstances, the preliminary decree passed for conducting election of new office bearers of the association within a period of two months from the date of decree is stayed till the disposal of the appeal.” 3. The grievance of the petitioners in this Writ Petition is that subsequently, the Court below has entertained IA No.374/10 and passed Ext.P9 order dated 27.01.2010. The petitioner would point out that in the light of the fact that there was a stay granted by the Appellate Court, the Court below should not have entertained IA No.374/10 and passed an order in the nature of Ext.P9. WPC 4890/10 3 4. If the petitioner has such a contention, it is for him to bring it to the notice of the Appellate Court before which the appeal is pending and point out that in spite of the stay order passed by it, the Trial Court has passed the impugned order. In that event, there is no reason to believe that the Appellate Court will not consider the grievance of the petitioner. The petitioner may approach the Appellate Court, praying for appropriate reliefs. To enable the petitioner to do so, the impugned order is kept in abeyance for a period of two weeks. If such a petition is filed by the petitioner, the Appellate Court shall dispose of the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sta WPC 4890/10 4 WPC 4890/10 5