KUTTY NANU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three second appeals arise out of the same suit and first appeal. There were 41 plaintiffs in O.S. No. 487 of 1978 on the file of the Munsiff, Thiruvalla. That suit was for a declaration that they are members belonging to Hindu Mala Araya Community. It is stated that they are entitled for the benefits available to the members of the Scheduled Tribe and the family members of the plaintiffs were given such benefits by the State. Since the Tahsildar refused caste certificate to the children of the plaintiffs stating that plaintiffs are not Hindu Mala Araya, the suit is filed.

(2.) The Trial Court decreed the suit. The decision of the Trial Court was based on Ext. A1 patta in respect of 17 cents of property assigned on registry in favour of the Mala Araya Karayogam, Ext. A2 true copy of the schedule showing the distribution of population numerically important Scheduled Tribes of Kerala and certain certificates issued by the Tahsildar, Thiruvalla, to some of the relatives of the petitioners. The contention of the defendants is that the plaintiffs belong to Araya Community which is not included in the list of Scheduled Castes / Scheduled Tribes. Araya Community is OBC (Other Backward Community). Certain documents were relied on by the defendants to show that the plaintiffs do not belong to Mala Araya Community. It is unnecessary to go into the details of these contentions in these second appeals.

(3.) The appellate court allowed the appeal filed by the defendants and found that the suit is not maintainable. The appellate court relied on the decision of the Supreme Court holding that there is an implied bar for the maintainability of such suits.