Kerala High Court
Kerala Vellala Maha Sabha (Kvms) vs Haridas K.P on 22 March, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1944
CRP NO. 210 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN AS NO.22/2020 OF DISTRICT
COURT,PATHANAMTHITTA
REVISION PETITIONER/PETITIONERS:
1 KERALA VELLALA MAHA SABHA (KVMS)
HEAD OFFICE AT DOOR NO. RP 11/303, THOTTAMON MURI,
RANNI VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, REPRESENTED BY ITS
GENERAL SECRETARY AND PRESIDENT (RESPONDENT NOS.2
AND 3 RESPECTIVELY)
2 THE GENERAL SECRETARY OF KVMS
HEAD OFFICE AT DOOR R.P NO.11/303, THOTTAMON MURI,
RANNI VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK.
3 THE PRESIDENT OF KVMS,
HEAD OFFICE AT DOOR R.P NO.11/303, THOTTAMON MURI,
RANNI VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK
4 N.MAHESAN
S/O.K.C. NARAYANA PILLAI, KOLLAMPARAMBU
PUTHENVEEDU, MATHRA P.O., PUNALUR.
5 MANAKKADU R. PADMANABHAN,
S/O.C.RAMANATHA PILLAI, 30, HARSHAN NAGAR,
MANAKKADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADVS.
JACOB P.ALEX
JOSEPH P.ALEX
MANU SANKAR P.
CRP NO. 210 OF 2021
2
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 HARIDAS K.P.
S/O.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, KRISHNAMRUTHAM HOUSE,
MALAYALAPUZHA ERAM MURI, MALAYALAPUZHA VILLAGE,
KONNI TALUK.PIN 689664
2 P.NATARAJA PILLAI
ADVOCATE, PUNALUR BAR ASSOCIATION, PUNALUR
(RETURNING OFFICER OF KVMS, RANNI, FOR THE YEAR
2017)PIN 691 305
BY ADVS.
P.VISWANATHAN (SR.)
AJITH VISWANATHAN
THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 22.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CRP NO. 210 OF 2021
3
ORDER
In this case revision petitioners are the respondents in A.S
No. 22/2020 pending before the District Court, Pathanamthitta.
During the pendency of this appeal, the respondents herein as
petitioners filed I.A No. 9/2021 contending that the suit itself
became infructuous. The learned District Judge adjudicated the
application on merits and finally dismissed the same holding that
when an appeal, if filed, the same should be disposed on merits.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out that
though Commissioner appointed by the District Court before the
impugned order cannot move further in view of the stay order
passed by this Court, he has been proceeding, ignoring the stay
order passed by this Court. However, the learned counsel fairly
conceded that disposal of this original petition after setting aside
the order impugned with liberty to the petitioners to argue the
infructuous nature of the suit to be left open.
4. The learned counsel appearing for other side also did
CRP NO. 210 OF 2021
not oppose such a prayer.
5. It appears that, narrating the subsequent events, after
the dismissal of the suit by the trial court, the petitioners filed I.A
No.9/2021 contending that the suit itself became infructuous.
However, the learned District Judge negatived the contention and
the same led to filing of this Civil Revision Petition.
6. When the factual matter involved in this case being
apprised, I could notice that the question as to the infructuous
nature of the suit can also be decided by the District Judge while
deciding the appeal itself on merits. The said suggestion made by
the learned counsel for revision petitioners is not opposed from
either side. Therefore, order in IA No.9/2021 is set aside and I
direct the learned District Judge to hear the question noted in the
IA No. 9/2021 while hearing the appeal itself on merits and pass a
considered judgment in the appeal.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that
during 2021 also the petitioners were elected as office bearers in
accordance with the law. Therefore, pendency of this appeal
further more is a hindrance for them to proceed with the proper
administration of the Sabha. Therefore an early disposal of the
CRP NO. 210 OF 2021
appeal is necessary. The other side also did not oppose early
disposal. Therefore, there shall be a direction to the District
Judge to hear and dispose of the appeal along with I.A No.9/2021
within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy
of this judgment. The interim order of stay shall stands vacated.
Sd/-
A.BADHARUDEEN
JUDGE
rpk
CRP NO. 210 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF CRP 210/2021
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS NO.70 OF
2017 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF'S COURT,
RANNY.
Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN OS
NO.70 OF 2017 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF'S
COURT, RANNY.
Annexure 3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED
22.1.2020 IN OS NO.70 OF 2017 AND
CONNECTED CASES OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,
RANNY.
Annexure 4 COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IN AS 22
OF 2020 BEFORE DISTRICT COURT,
PATHANAMTHITTA.
Annexure 5 TRUE COPY OF THE IA NO.2 OF 2020 IN AS
NO.22 OF 2020 BEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT,
PATHANAMTHITTA.
Annexure 6 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED
IN IA.NO.2 OF 2020 IN AS NO.22 OF 2020
BEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT,
PATHANAMTHITTA.
Annexure 7 TRUE COPY OF THE SUGGESTION NOTES
SUBMITTED BY APPELLANTS IN IA NO.2 OF
2020 IN AS NO.22 OF 2020 BEFORE DISTRICT
COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA.
Annexure 8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 9.4.2021 IN
IA NO.7 OF 2021 IN AS NO.22 OF 2020 OF
DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA.
Annexure 9 TRUE COPY OF THE IA NO.9 OF 2021 IN AS
NO.22 OF 2020 BEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT,
CRP NO. 210 OF 2021
PATHANAMTHITTA.
Annexure 10 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT IN IA NO.9 OF 2021 IN AS
NO.22 OF 2020 BEFORE THE DISTRICT COURT,
PATHANAMTHITTA.
Annexure 11 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 22.4.2021
ISSUED BY ADV. P.R.SHIBU.
Annexure 12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 26.4.2021
ISSUED TO ADV. P.R.SHIBU ON BEHALF OF
PETITIONERS.
Annexure 13 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 7.6.2021 IN
IA NO.1 OF 2021 IN FAO NO.36 OF 2021 OF
THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
Annexure 14 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN ARGUMENTS
SUBMITTED BY PETITIONERS IN IA NO.9 OF
2021 IN AS NO.22 OF 2020 BEFORE THE
DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA.
Annexure 15 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN ARGUMENTS
SUBMITTED BY RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS IN IA
9 OF 2021 IN AS NO.22 OF 2020 BEFORE THE
DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA.
