Kerala High Court
S. Jayaprakash vs Oachira Parabrahma Temple on 11 April, 2025
2025:KER:32223
OP(C) NO. 992 of 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 21ST CHAITHRA, 1947
OP(C) NO. 992 OF 2025
I.A. No.58/2025 IN OS NO.1 OF 2006 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT
(ADHOC), KOLLAM
PETITIONER/1st RESPONDENT/2ND PLAINTIFF:
S. JAYAPRAKASH
AGED 70 YEARS
S/O SREEDHARAN, KALARIKKAL, KADATHOOR, K.S. PURAM,
KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM, PIN - 690518
BY ADVS. K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN
PINKU MARIAM JOSE
K.M.FATHIMA
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT AND 2ND AND 3RD PETITIONERS/DEFENDANT AND 1ST
AND 3RD PLAINTIFF:
1 OACHIRA PARABRAHMA TEMPLE
REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR, OACHIRA,
KOLLAM., PIN - 690525
2 M.R.BINAL DANI
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O. M.S.RUDRAN, MUKKADATHU HOUSE, SRAYIKKADU,
KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM, PIN - 690518
3 S.SASIDHARAN PILLAI
AGED 71 YEARS
S/O SREEDHARAN PILLAI, KANNADIYIL, MEMANA, OACHIRA (PO),
KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690525
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.04.2025, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:32223
OP(C) NO. 992 of 2025
2
P.M. MANOJ, J
------------------
OP(C) No. 992 of 2025
----------------------
Dated this the 11th day of April, 2025
JUDGMENT
The Original Petition is preferred for the expeditious disposal of
Ext.P2, I.A. No.58 of 2025 in O.S. No.1 of 2006 pending before the
First Addl. District Court, Kollam.
2. The petitioner is the second plaintiff in the above Suit filed
under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for framing a
scheme for the administration of Ochira Parambrahma Temple and its
assets, a public religion and charitable trust.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that a preliminary decree passed
in the above Suit was challenged before this Court in RFA No.562/2010
and the same was disposed of by judgment dated 02.03.2020. Against
which a Civil Appeal Nos.13708 & 13709 of 2024 were preferred before
the Apex Court. Those Civil Appeals and Contempt Petition (Civil)
Nos.987 & 988 of 2023 were heard together and judgment was
rendered on 03.12.2024, whereby Justice K. Ramakrishnan, a retired
Judge of this Court was appointed as Administrative
2025:KER:32223
OP(C) NO. 992 of 2025
Head/Administrator to conduct the election for the administration and
management of the temple and its allied institutions in a free and fair
manner.
4. However, as per Clause (x), Paragraph 16 of the judgment
grants the right to the parties to raise all the issues touching upon their
rights before the trial court in the final decree proceedings. In the
meanwhile, persons handling the affairs of the temple, without any
right and in violation of the provisions of the bye-law and the positive
directions in the RFA, fraudulently created documents so as to make it
appear that the petitioner and certain others were removed from the
executive committee and the working committee of the temple and was
disqualified to contest in the elections for a term of 7 years in terms of
Section 34 of the bye-laws in the alleged meeting held on 07.04.2022.
5. This being the situation, the petitioner apprehends that the
Administrator will not allow the petitioner and two others i.e.,
respondents 2 and 3, who are the persons stated to have been
disqualified to contest in the election, filed I.A. No. 58/2025 in OS No.
1 of 2006 for a direction to the Administrator to permit them to
participate and contest the election to the Administrative Committee of
the Ochira Parambrahma Temple. In a similar situation, I.A. Nos.57,
2025:KER:32223
OP(C) NO. 992 of 2025
59 and 65 of 2025 were filed and pending. A common objection was
filed in all the applications. Even after several postings, the I.As are
not yet disposed of. According to the petitioner, the respondent
Administrator is taking steps for the preparation of the voters list and
if the I.As are not disposed of, the valuable rights claimed by the
petitioner and others to contest the election will be defeated. That will
cause irreparable injury and loss to the petitioner. This is the
circumstance in which the Original Petition is preferred seeking a
direction to the Addl. District Court, Kollam to consider and dispose of
Ext.P2 application in accordance with law, as early as possible, within
a time stipulated by this Court.
6. On hearing the arguments put forward by the learned counsel
for the petitioner Sri.K.S. Hariharaputhran, and considering the limited
nature of the prayer, I prefer to dispense notice to the respondents.
Accordingly, notice to the respondents is dispensed with.
7. Going by the averments and pleadings, it appears that by
Ext.P1, an Administrator has been appointed, and specific terms have
been given under paragraph 16 of Ext.P1 judgment in Civil Appeal
No.13708-13709 of 2024. But it is alleged that in a meeting held on
07.04.2022, the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 are disqualified
2025:KER:32223
OP(C) NO. 992 of 2025
under Section 34 of the bye-law, the legality of which is a matter to be
examined by the trial court prior to the preparation of the voters list
by the Administrator so appointed. Otherwise, if such steps are taken,
it will be in violation of the provisions of law, which will result in
injustice. However, without going into the merit, the only remedy
available to protect the interest of the petitioner is to direct the trial
court to consider the I.A. stated to be pending before the trial court
and dispose of it as expeditiously as possible. Since information with
respect to the probable time that may be required to dispose of the
application is not obtained from the trial court, the only direction that
can be given is to consider and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously
as possible, without prescribing a time limit.
8. Considering the aforementioned factors, there will be a
direction to the trial court to take earnest steps to consider and pass
appropriate orders on the pending Interlocutory Application produced
as Ext.P2, as expeditiously as possible.
Accordingly, the Original Petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
P.M.MANOJ
JUDGE
ttb
2025:KER:32223
OP(C) NO. 992 of 2025
APPENDIX OF OP(C) 992/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 3.12.2024 OF
THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.
13708 - 13709 OF 2024
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF IA 58/2025 DATED 18.2.2025 FILED
IN OS NO.1/2006, ON THE FILES OF THE 1ST ADDL.
DISTRICT JUDGE'S COURT, KOLLAM
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 7.3.2025 FILED
IN IA 57/2025 IN OS NO.1/2006, ON THE FILES OF
THE 1ST ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE'S COURT, KOLLAM,
