IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2011 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1932 OP(C).No. 1066 of 2011(O) -------------------------------------- (AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 04/02/2011 IN O.P(SOCIETY) NO.993/2010 IN I.A.NO.4975/2010 OF IST ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM) .................... PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS ------------------------------------------ 1. C.R. AJITHKUMAR, AGED 39, S/O.C.M. RAMACHANDRAN, CHAVUKKA PARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, COCHIN-12. 2. A.P. BHANU PRAKASH, AGED 55, S/O. PINBABU, ALINGAL HOUSE, PACHALAM, KOCHI-12. 3. ABHILASH KRISHNAN, AGED 32, S/O. KRISHNAN, ALINGAL HOUSE, PACHALAM, KOCHI-12. 4. K. NATARAJAN, AGED 50, S/O. SURYAN, THUNDIPARAMBU, PACHALAM, KOCHI-12. 5. A.N. MOHANAN, AGED 52, S/O. NARAYANAN SHETTY, ALINGAL HOUSE, PACHALAM, KOCHI-12. 6. V.D. SREENIVAN, AGED 68, S/O. DAMODARAN, VETTIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 7. K.S. RAJESH, AGED 33, S/O SIVAN, NEDUVELI PARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 8. T.P.UDAYA KUMAR, AGED 40, S/O. PINBABU, THUNDIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 9. T.R. RAJESH, AGED 35, S/O.T.N.RAMARAO, THUNDIPARAMBU, VADUTHALA, KOCHI-12. sts O.P.(CIVIL)NO.1066/2011 10. V.D. ANIL KUMAR, AGED 48, S/O. DAYANANDAN, VETTIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 11. T.S. REGHUNATH, AGED 66, S/O. SREENIVASAN, THEKKUMTHALA PARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 12. V.G. ABHIMANIEW, AGED 46, S/O. GOPALAKRISHNAN, VETTIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 13. T.N. VIJAYAN, AGED 54, S/O. NARAYAN SHETTY, THUNDIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 14. V.G. KRISHNAN, AGED 42, S/O. GOPALAKRISHNA, VETTIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 15. T.N. SAJEEVAN, AGED 38, S/O. NARAYAN SHETTY, THUNDIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 16. T.R. AJITH, AGED 38, S/O. RAMACHANDRAN, THUNDIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 17. T.G. SURESH, AGED 40, S/O. GOVINDA SHETTY, THUNDI PARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 18. A.R. SURYADAS, AGED 54, S/O.K.V. RAMADAS, ALINGAL HOUSE, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 19. T.N. GOPALAKRISHNAN, AGED 45, S/O. NILAMBARA SHETTY, THUNDIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 20. T.H. PRAKASHAN, AGED 39, S/O. HARIBABU, THUNDIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. BY ADV. DR.V.N.SANKARJEE RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. PACHALAM ERATTAKULANGARA (KATTUNGAL) BHAGAVATHY DEVASWOM, PACHALAM, COCHIN -12, REG. NO. ER 25/90, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY, REP. BY SRI.K.K.SATHEESH, ADVOCATE, OFFICIAL RECEIVER APPOINTED IN O.S 1324/09 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM. O.P.(CIVIL)NO.1066/2011 2. K.R. RAMESHAN, AGED ABOUT 50, S/O.K.V. RAMACHANDRAN, KALAZHATHU PARAMBU, PACHALAM, KOCHI -12. 3. K.R. MOHANAN, AGED ABOUT 40, S/O.K.P. RAJU, KARUVELIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 4. K.R. DIVAKARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 62, S/O. RAI RAO, KARUVELIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 5. K.R. MOHANAN, AGED ABOUT 64, S/O. RAMAN, PUTHUKKALAVATTOM, ELAMAKKARA, ERNAKULAM. 6. T.B. RAJARATHNAM, AGED ABOUT 52, S/O.T.B. BHASKARA RAO, THUNDIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 7. K.R. PRAKASHAN, AGED ABOUT 39, S/O.K.V. RAMADAS, KALAZHATHU PARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 8. T.P ARUN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 35, S/O.T.S. PRABHAKARAN, THEKKUMTHALA PARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 9. T.B. BALU, AGED 36, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN, THUNDIPARAMBIL, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 10. M.D CHANDRASEKHARAN, AGED 43, S/O.M.B. DASHARADHAN, MADAPATTU HOUSE, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 11. K.P.AJITH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 45, S/O. PADMANABHA SHETTY, KUVAKATTU PARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 12. T.N. RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED ABOUT 54, S/O. NEELASARA SHETTY, THUNDIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 13. V.G. KRISHNAN, AGED ABOUT 65, S/O. JOGYA SHETTY, ALUKKAL VEDU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 14. P.B. MANIKKALAL, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, S/O. BALU SHETTY, PALAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. sts O.P.(CIVIL)NO.1066/2011 15. K.P. SANTHOSH, AGED ABOUT 40, S/O.K.V. PARAMESWARAN, KALAZHATHU PARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 16. P.C. PRADEEP, AGED ABOUT 35, S/O. CHANDRAN, KARUVELIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. 17. K.G. BABU, AGED ABOUT 31, S/O. GOPI, KARUVELIPARAMBU, PACHALAM.P.O, KOCHI -12. BY THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts P. BHAVADASAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - O.P.(Civil). No. 1066 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of March, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 4.2.2011 in I.A.4975 of 2010 in O.P.(Society) 993 of 2010. 2. Petitioners are the members of a Society registered under the Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioners along with others have approached the District Court for settling a scheme. There is also another suit pending as O.S.1324 of 2009 before the Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam. Due to the orders in that suit, the Society is not able to function properly. It is also pointed out by them that the said suit was not maintainable in view of the provisions of the Act. They wanted the said suit to be stayed. 3. The court below on a consideration of the materials found that there was no ground to stay the O.P.(C). 1066/2011. 2 proceedings in the suit pending before the Munsiff's Court and dismissed the application. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners stressed before this court that under the inherent jurisdiction conferred under the Code as per Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it is possible for the court to stay further proceedings in O.S.1324 of 2009. It is contended that the said suit is not maintainable and the Munsiff's Court, ought not to have entertained the suit. It is also pointed out that the petitioners have approached the District Court for settling a scheme and they have also filed an application for appointment of a receiver and the said petitions are pending before the District Court. 5. If the petitioners have a case that the suit before the Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam, O.S.1324 of 2009 is not maintainable in law, it is for them to urge it before the said court and not to attack the orders passed in that suit. Nothing prevented the petitioners from approaching the Munsiff's Court and point out that in view of the provisions of O.P.(C). 1066/2011. 3 the Act and contend that the said suit ought not to have been entertained by the Munsiff's Court. Instead of taking that course, they rushed to the District Court seeking stay of the O.S.1324 of 2009 pending before the Munsiff's Court. The District Court was perfectly justified in rejecting the plea. 6. No jurisdictional error or irregularity is seen in the order passed by the District Court. However, it is made clear that if the petitioners wish to approach the Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam, they will be at liberty to do so and none of the observations made by the District Court and this Court will not stand in the way of seeking appropriate reliefs. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sb.