IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2010 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 OP(C).No. 1099 of 2010(O) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 14/09/2010 IN IA.446/2010 IN OS.1/2008 of D.C.& SESSIONS COURT,THODUPUZHA .................... (S): PETITIONERS/IST AND 2ND DEFENDANTS ------------------------------------------------------ 1. IDUKKI DISTRICT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, THODUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS HONORARY SECRETARY, B.VINOD, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, MADATHIPARAMBIL, RIVER VIEW ROAD, THODUPUZHA.P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 584. 2. KERALA CRICKET ASSOCIATION, COMPLEX, T.C.24/131(1), SHASTHAMKOVIL ROAD, THYCAUD.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014, REP.BY ITS HONORARY SECRETARY, T.C.MATHEW, S/O.T.V.CHACKO AGED 46 YEARS, NOW RESIDING AT 4D, CONDOR MARIGOLD VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI P.CHALY SRI.R.SANJITH RESPONDENT(S): PLAINTIFFS/DEFENDANTS 3-20 ----------------------------------------- 1. ATHULYA CRICKET CLUB, NEDIYASALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BIJU V.R., S/O.RAJAPPAN NAIR, VALIYAVEETTIL HOUSE, KOLANI (P.O), THODUPUZHA-685 584. 2. DEVDHAR CRICKET CLUB, VADAKKUMURI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.A.VINOD, S/O.AYYAPPAN PILLAI, PUTHUKOLIL HOUSE, MUTHALAKODAM.P.O., THODUPUZHA. 685 605. 3. SECRETARY, IDUKKI DISTRICT SPORTS COUNCIL, THODUPUZHA.P.O. 685 584. 4. RENGAKELI CRICKET CLUB, VENGALLOOR, THODUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SRI.R.RAMESH, PULLAMPARA MADAM, THODUPUZHA KARA, THODUPUZHA VILLAGE. 685 584. OP(C).No. 1099 of 2010 5. SECRETARY, JAI HIND LIBRARY, MUTHALAKODAM.P.O., THODUPUZHA. 685 605. 6. MANAKU CRICKET CLUB, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MANAKADU.P.O., THODUPUZHA. 685 584. 7. DIGITAL CRICKET CLUB, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, RIVERVIEW ROAD, THODUPUZHA.P.O.-685584. 8. PURAPUZHA CRICKET CLUB, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SRI.PADMANABHAN.M. - 685 583. 9. ARIKUZHA CRICKET CLUB, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ARIKUZHA.P.O., THODUPUZHA. 685 584. 10. KARIMANNOOR CRICKET CLUB, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KARIMANNOOR.P.O. 685 581. 11. POORNIMA CRICKET CLUB, IDUKKI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.J.JOSEPH, PAINAVU.P.O. 685 584. 12. CAMMANDOZ CRICKET CLUB, KARIKODU, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NAJEEB.K.P., KARAKUNNUMPURATHU HOUSE, KARIKODU.P.O., THODUPUZHA, THODUPUZHA EAST.P.O. 685 585. 13. ACQUA CRICKET CLUB, THODUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNDEKALLU, MANAKKADU.P.O., THODUPUZHA. 685 584. 14. MUTTOM CRICKET CLUB, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUTTOM.P.O. 685 587. 15. M'SHARE (EDAVETTY CC) CRICKET CLUB, EDAVETTY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, EDAVETTY.P.O., THODUPUZHA. 685 588. 16. ST.JOSEPH'S (MOOLAMATTOM CC) CRICKET CLUB, MOOLAMATTOM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 685 589. 17. NEELIMA CRICKET CLUB (VETTIMATTOM CC) VETTIMATTOM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VETTIMATTOM.P.O., THODUPUZHA. 685 584. 18. VIVIDS CRICKET CLUB, KALAYANTHANI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KALAYANTHANI.P.O., THODUPUZHA. 685 588. OP(C).No. 1099 of 2010 19. LAKOTIA CRICKET CLUB (COMPUTER CENTRE), THODUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THODUPUZHA.P.O. 685 584. 20. DEFENDER CRICKET CLUB, ELLUMPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ELLUMPURAM.P.O., MUTTOM VILLAGE. 685 587. THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- O.P(C).No.1099 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 10th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT Defendant Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.1 of 2008 of the court of learned District Judge, Thodupuzha are the petitioners before me challenging Ext.P1, order and seeking direction to the learned District Judge to dispose of I.A.No.432 of 2008 filed by the petitioners seeking reference of the dispute to the arbitration. 2. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed the suit in the court of learned District Judge seeking declaration regarding the activities of petitioner No.1 and for other reliefs. Petitioners contended that the suit if purported to be one under Sec.25 of the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific & Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955 (for short, “the Act”) is not maintainable since reliefs sought for are not in accordance with Sec.25 of the said Act and not less than 10% of the members of the society have not joined as plaintiffs. Petitioners further contended that the court of learned District Judge had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit on various grounds stated by them. They filed I.A.No.432 of 2008 under Sec.81(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (for short, “the Arbitration Act”) challenging jurisdiction of the O.P(C).No.1099 of 2010 : 2 : court to entertain the suit since agreement provided for arbitration. Petitioner No.1 filed W.P.C.No.20851 of 2008 for a direction to the learned District Judge to dispose of I.A.No.432 of 2008 and this court directed learned District Judge to consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law on I.A.No.432 of 2008 before passing any order on the application for injunction or other applications. That order was sought to be reviewed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 vide R.P.No.877 of 2008 and this court disposed of that review petition vide order dated August 19, 2008 clarifying as follows: “When a petition under Sec.81(1) of the Arbitration Act is filed, before dealing with the suit, trial court is bound to consider whether there is a valid agreement executed by the parties and it contains an arbitration clause. If the conditions provided under Sec.81(1) of the Arbitration Act are satisfied, court shall refer the judgment, it was directed not to pass any order in any other application, before disposing I.A.No.432 of 2008. That does not mean that the court is not competent to pass an order in an application filed under Order VI Rule 17 or Order I of Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure. There is no apparent error or other sufficient reason to review the judgment. Review petition is dismissed.” O.P(C).No.1099 of 2010 : 3 : Later, respondent Nos.1 and 2 sought amendment of the plaint and that was rejected by the learned District Judge. That order was challenged in W.P.(C).No.2562 of 2009. This court by judgment dated June 24, 2009 allowed the writ petition and permitted respondent Nos.1 and 2 to amend the plaint. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed I.A.No.446 of 2010 for publication under Rule 8 of Order I of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, “the Code”). That application was allowed as per Ext.P1, order which is under challenge. Learned counsel contends that when jurisdiction of the court itself is under challenge particularly in view of the arbitration clause contained in the agreement (as learned counsel submits), learned District Judge could not have passed Ext.P1, order. It is also contended that the fact that no orders are passed on I.A.No.432 of 2008 puts petitioner in a very difficult and embarrassing situation regarding conduct of the case. 3. The challenge to Ext.P1, order I am unable to accept in the light of the order passed by this court on R.P.No.877 of 2008 and the relevant portion of which I have quoted above. There is no reason to interfere with Ext.P1, order. But, Ext.P8 (I.A.No.432 of 2008) requires to be disposed of as early as O.P(C).No.1099 of 2010 : 4 : possible. In fact, this court while disposing of W.P(C).No.20851 of 2008 vide judgment dated July 10, 2008 directed learned District Judge to dispose of I.A.No.432 of 2008 (Ext.P1 in that writ petition). Learned District Judge has to dispose of I.A.No.432 of 2010 as early as possible. Resultantly this writ petition is disposed of directing learned District Judge to dispose of Ext.P8, I.A.No.432 of 2008 as early as possible keeping in mind the directions issued by this court in judgment in W.P(C).No.20851 of 2008 and order in R.P.No.877 of 2008. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-