IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2009 / 20TH SRAVANA 1931 RSA.No. 530 of 2009() --------------------- AS.55/2006 of ADDL.SUB COURT, THALASSERY OS.396/2001 of MUNSIFF'S COURT, KUTHUPARAMBA .................... APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS ---------------------------------------- 1. V.R.BHASKARAN, S/O.ANANDAN NAMBIAR, AGED 57 YEARS, KEEZHALLUR AMSOM, ELAMPARA DESOM, P.O.ELAMPARA, THALASSERY TALUK. 2. N.RAJAN, S/O.KUNHIRAMAN, AGED 54 YEARS KEEZHALLUR AMSOM, THERUR DESOM, P.O.EDAYANNUR. 3. K.RAVINDRAN, S/O.GOVINDAN NAMBIAR, BANK EMPLOYEE, KEEZHALLUR ELAMPARA DESOM, P.O.ELAMPARA, THALASSERY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.PAVITHRAN RESPONDENTS: DEFENDANTS ------------------------------------------ 1. K.BALAKRISHNAN, S/O.KORAN, RTD.TEACHER, KEEZHALLUR AMSOM, EDAYANNUR DESOM, P.O.EDAYANNUR. 2. AMERI PADMANABHAN, S/O.KANNAN, PENSIONER, RESIDING AT DO. DO. 3. THERUR EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.THERUR, THALASSERY TALUK. THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------------ R.S.A.No.530 of 2009 ------------------------------ Dated this the 11th day of August,2009 JUDGMENT The plaintiffs in O.S.No.396 of 2001 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Kuthuparamba are the appellants. The appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.55 of 2006 on the file of the Sub Court, Thalassery. The suit was dismissed and confirmed in appeal. Hence the second appeal. The suit was filed for declaration that defendants 1 and 2 are not competent to conduct the election to the office of the governing body of Therur Educational Society. The parties herein are hereinafter referred to as plaintiffs and defendants. The plaintiffs are the members of the society. 2. It is the case of the plaintiff's that the 3rd defendant is the elected secretary of the Therur Educational Society in the last election held. The defendants 1 and 2 disputed the contention of the plaintiffs that the 3rd defendant is the secretary of the society. The election to the society is proposed to be held on 14/10/2001. According to the defendants 1 & 2 the election conducted before the expiry of the term of office of the office bearers and therefore the R.S.A.No.530 of 2009 2 contention of the plaintiff cannot be accepted. The plaintiff contented that the proposed election scheduled to be held on 14/10/2001 is invalid for several reasons. The election proposed is in violation of the provisions of bye-laws and therefore the proposed election is illegal. 3. The trial court referred to Ext.A2, common judgment in an earlier suit holding that there is no valid election held on 4/1/1998 and therefore the election said to be conducted on 4/1/1998 held to be illegal. The trial court held that since the plaintiffs did not seek the intervention of the court to conduct the free and fair election, the declaration that the 1st and 2nd defendants are incompetent to conduct election will not serve any purpose. Therefore, the suit was dismissed holding that the plaintiffs are not entitled to the relief prayed for in the suit. The plaintiffs filed first appeal and the defendants 1 and 2 filed cross appeal. The appellate court noted the fact that since there was no interim relief granted by the trial court, the election was held as per schedule. The tenure of the elected committee was 3 years. The appellate court has noted that when the suit came up for trial the prayer R.S.A.No.530 of 2009 3 has become infructuous. The earlier suit was also dismissed for the reason that it has become infructuous by Ext.A2 judgment. 4. By the time when the trial of the suit commenced, the suit itself has become infructuous because the election was conducted. The elected committee was constituted to administer the affairs of the society for the 3 years term. When the trial commenced in 2006 the term has expired long back. The appellate court also rightly noticed that the election as per schedule was held on 14/10/2001. The elected committee held office administration for 3 years from the date of taking charge. Three year term is over by the time when the appellate court considered the matter on merit. The appellate court rightly observed that the suit has become infructuous. 5. This court has taken note of the above facts. In fact the trial court should not have proceeded with the trial of the suit having found that the election held as per schedule and the term expired. Therefore, the consideration of the matter on merits was unnecessary. The appellate court also should have taken note of this fact and dismissed the appeal and the suit finding that the suit has become infructuous. I am of the view R.S.A.No.530 of 2009 4 that the both courts should not have entered a decision on merit. In view of the said fact this court is not proposed to go into the merits of the findings passed by the courts below. In fact, the findings and reasonings recorded by the both courts should have been avoided, since the suit has become infructuous. The findings on issues also are unnecessary and have no force. In the circumstances the appeal is devoid of merit. The appeal is disposed of on the above said observations. HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE skj.