IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 21ST MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3855 of 2010(O) ------------------------- CMA.107/2009 of DISTRICT COURT, PALAKKAD OS.376/2009 of MUNSIFF COURT, CHITTUR .................... PETITIONER/APPELLANT/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: ------------------------------------------------------ T.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, S/O. LATE YASODAMMA, PUTHEN HOUSE, MATHUR AMSOM DESOM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.TOM K.THOMAS RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. T.KUMARAN NAIR, S/O. LATE KALYANIKUTTY AMMA, "SREE PAVITHRAM", PADINJAREYAKKARA DESOM, CHANDANAMKURISSI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. RAJENDRAN, S/O. LEELA NAIR, RAJALAKSHMI HOUSE, POKKUNNI ROAD, VADAVANOOR AMSOM, CHITTOOR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR , J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). No. 3855 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of February, 2010. JUDGMENT The plaintiff in O.S. No. 376 of 2009 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Chittur is the writ petitioner. The said suit was one for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the management of a private temple belonging to a Nair Tharavadu by name Thodanjath Nair Tharavadu. The name of the temple is Puthukkully Baghavathy temple. The case of the plaintiff is that as per a partition deed of the year 1934, the aforesaid temple was kept in common with a provision that the senior most male member shall manage the tharavadu temple and in the event of the default on the part of the senior most male member, he can be removed by the other members of the tharavadu. Admittedly, the 1st defendant is a the senior most male member and he enjoys the status of a hereditary trustee under the provisions of the Madras Hindu Religious W.P.(C) No. 3855/2010 : 2 : and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951. The plaintiff's case is that 32 members in a meeting removed the 1st defendant on 11.07.2009 and subsequently the said removal was ratified by another 28 members. The above case of the plaintiff is vehemently denied by the 1st defendant. Hence, the court below was not called upon to decide this main issue at the interlocutory suit. Even though both the courts have declined to grant an interim injunction as prayed for, the lower appellate court has rightly vacated the finding recorded by the trial court that the suit is not maintainable. Such a finding could not have been recorded while disposing of an interlocutory application. The question as to whether the 1st defendant has committed default and further whether he was validly removed by the majority of the members of the tharavadu and what exactly is the total strength of the tharavadu are all the matters to be decided during the trial of the suit. Hence, it cannot be said that the courts below were wrong in refusing interim injunction as W.P.(C) No. 3855/2010 : 3 : prayed for. The petitioner will have to prove his case after adducing evidence during the trial of the suit. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed with a direction to the trial court to dispose of the suit untramelled by the observations and findings in the orders of the trial court as well as the lower appellate court. Dated this the 10th day of February, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv