DEVASWOM VILAYIL KUNNATHU TEMPLE Vs. DEVAKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SA No. 845 of 1997 arises out of OS No. 188 of 1992 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Paravoor. The suit was originally filed as OS No. 434 of 1989 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Kollam which was transferred to the Munsiff's Court, Paravoor where it was re-numbered. OS No. 188 of 1992 was filed by Devaswam, Vilayil Kunnathu Temple and its President and Secretary against Devaki and Damodaran for recovery of possession of the plaint B and C scheduled buildings and for permanent injunction restraining them from entering into Ascheduled property after recovery of possession. The plaint A schedule property is having an extent of one acre and 28 cents. The temple and its appurtenances are situated in that property. Plaint B and C schedules are two buildings situated in the A schedule property. The Trial Court dismissed the suit as per the judgment and decree dated 27/2/1993 On appeal by the defendants as AS No. 152 of 1994 on the file of the Court of the District Judge, Kollam, the appeal was dismissed and the judgment and decree of the Trial Court were confirmed. SA No. 845 of 1997 is filed by the plaintiffs challenging the concurrent decisions of the Courts below.

(2.) OS No. 384 of 1991 on the file of the Munsiff's Court Paravoor was filed by Vilayil Kunnathu Durga Devi Temple and the President and Secretary of the Devaswam The defendants in the suit are the Director of Survey and Land Records, the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, the District Collector, the Tahsildar, the Government, Devaki and Saraswathi. The sixth defendant-Devaki is the first defendant in OS No. 188 of 1992. The seventh defendant- Saraswathi is the daughter of the sixth defendant-Devaki. OS Nc. 384 of 1991 was originally filed as OS No. 206 of 1990 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Kollam, which was transferred to the Munsiff's Court, Paravoor where it was re-numbered as OS No. 384 of 1991. OS No. 384 of 1991 was filed for setting aside the Resurvey Sub Division in respect of the disputed item and for a declaration of the title and possession of the Devaswam in the Resurvey Sub Division having an extent of 19.55 Ares shown in the B schedule which form part of the total extent of one acre 28 cents shown in the plaint A schedule. There is also a prayer for mandatory injunction directing defendants 1 to 5 to include the disputed resurvey plot (B schedule) in the name of the Devaswam. The Trial Court dismissed the suit On appeal by the plaintiffs as AS No. 235 of 1996 on the file of the Court of the District Judge, Kollam the Appellate Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and decree of the Trial Court and decreed the suit. SA No. 52 of 2002 is filed by defendants 6 and 7 in the suit.

(3.) IN 1988, Bhoodhana Udampadi (Ext. A2 in OS No. 384 of 1991 and Ext. A4 in OS No. 188 of 1992) was executed by some of the members of the family for administration of the temple and property. The contesting defendants contended that they are not parties to the 1988 document and that it is not binding on them. They filed OS No. 329 of 1989 before the Sub Court, Kollam for a declaration that the plaintiff's and defendants are the members of the Vilayil Kunnathu family entitled to participate in the affairs of temple and its assets and for settlement of a scheme for the administration of the submitted that there are conflicting findings in OS No. 188 of 1992 and OS No. 384 of 1991 and in the appeals therefrom. IN OS No. 188 of 1992, it was found that the plaintiffs have not established exclusive title to the property whereas the finding in OS No. 384 of 1991 is that the plaintiffs have title to the property.