Kerala High Court
Baby vs Karumancherry Karunyapuram ... on 30 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021/9TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943
OP(C) NO. 770 OF 2020
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OS 537/2019 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT,
CHERTHALA
PETITIONERS:
1 BABY
AGED 62 YEARS
W/O.CLETUS, OONATTU HOUSE, EZHUPUNNA SOUTH P.O.,
CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688535.
2 KSHEMA SHAJI,
AGED 41 YEARS
W/O.SHAJI, OONATTU HOUSE, EZHUPUNNA SOUTH P.O.,
CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688535.
BY ADVS.
V.N.SANKARJEE
SRI.V.N.MADHUSUDANAN
SMT.R.UDAYA JYOTHI
SRI.M.M.VINOD
SMT.M.SUSEELA
SMT. KEERTHI B. CHANDRAN
SHRI.VIJAYAN PILLAI P.K.
SRI.SUDHAKARAN V.
RESPONDENTS:
1 KARUMANCHERRY KARUNYAPURAM ST.SEBASTIAN CHURCH
EZHUPUNNA SOUTH P.O., -688535, KODAMTHURUTHU VILLAGE,
CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS
VICAR REV. FR. ANTONY NEDUMPARAMBIL.
2 KOCHI DIOCESE,
BISHOP'S HOUSE, FOR KOCHI P.O., KOCHI TALUK, KOCHI-
682001, REPRESENTED BY BISHOP MOST REV. JOSEPH KARIYIL,
FORT KOCHI-682001, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
3 THE VICAR GENERAL KOCHI DIOCESE,
BISHOP'S HOUSE, FORT KOCHI, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, KOCHI-682001.
BY ADVS.
SRI.SHIJU VARGHESE
SRI.B.J.YESUDAS
O.P(C). No.770/2020 2
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
O.P(C). No.770/2020 3
V.G.ARUN, J.
===========================
O.P(C).No.770 of 2020
===========================
Dated this the 30th day of November, 2021
JUDGMENT
The plaintiffs in O.S.No.537 of 2019 pending on the file of
Principal Munsiff Court, Cherthala has filed this original petition,
aggrieved by Ext.P8 order, dismissing their application for
appointment of Advocate Commissioner. Petitioners had sought the
appointment of Advocate Commissioner for the purpose of opening
the vault in the cemetry where the first petitioner's husband was
buried. The basis for such a prayer, is the apprehension of the first
petitioner that the defendants had removed the mortal remains of
her husband, without her volition and knowledge. The Trial Court
dismissed the application, based on the document produced by the
respondents, and the affidavit filed of the Vicar, stating that the
petitioner's husband's tomb was not opened and the remnants of
the body are inside the vault.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
counsel for the respondents, at length.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, the
first petitioner only wanted to ensure that the remnants of her
husband's corpse was not removed unauthorisedly.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that as the
number of vaults in the cemetery was limited, the procedure
adopted by the Church is to open the vault by turn after one year
of burial and the next vault to be opened in the one in which first
petitioner's husband's body is buried. It is reiterated that the vault
was not opened after burial and the remnants are within the vault
itself.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
first petitioner will be satisfied if she is put on notice before
opening the vault. It is clarified by the learned counsel for the
respondents that the custom of the Church is to make public
announcement regarding the death of a parishioner and therefore,
even without personal notice, first petitioner will come to know
about the next burial.
6. In view of the apprehension voiced by the first petitioner,
it is only appropriate that she be put on notice before opening the
vault in which her husband is buried. Such information can be
passed over telephone or even by informing the learned Counsel
for the petitioners. It is made clear that the second petitioner need
not be informed about the opening of the vault.
The original petition is disposed of with the above direction
and without interfering with Ext.P8, interlocutory order.
sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
lgk
APPENDIX OF OP(C) 770/2020
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT DATED 2.11.2019 IN
O.S.NO.537/2019 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,
CHERTHALA.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTION APPLICATION
I.A.NO.3873/2018 DATED 2.11.2019 IN
O.S.NO.537/2019 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,
CHERTHALA.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4.11.2019 IN
I.A.NO.3873/2018 DATED 2.11.2019 IN
O.S.NO.537/2019 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,
CHERTHALA.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED
5.12.2019 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN
I.A.NO.3873/2018 DATED 2.11.2019 IN
O.S.NO.537/2019 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,
CHERTHALA.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.12.2019 IN
I.A.NO.3873/2019 IN O.S.NO.537/2019 OF THE
MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHERTHALA.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
14.1.2020 IN I.A.NO.1/2020 IN
I.A.NO.3873/2019 IN O.S.NO.537/2019 OF THE
MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHERTHALA.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED
3.2.2020 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN
I.A.NO.1/2020 IN I.A.NO.3873/2019 IN
O.S.NO.537/2019 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,
CHERTHALA.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.2.2020 IN
I.A.NO.1/2020 IN I.A.NO.3873/2019 IN
O.S.NO.537/2019 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,
CHERTHALA.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT DATED
22.2.2020 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN
O.S.NO.537/2019 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,
CHERTHALA.
