SUNDARESAN NAIR Vs. S KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants are appellants. They challenge in this appeal, an order of remand passed by the District Court. As per the said order, District Court allowed an amendment in favour of plaintiffs by which a prayer for declaration was permitted to be incorporated in the pkint. Defendants-appellants were allowed to file additional written statement, once the amendment is allowed. The appellants court also gave direction to trial court to give opportunity to both sides to adduce evidence. With these directions, the suit was remanded to trial court for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

(2.) Facts, briefly: The plaintiffs-respondents filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction before the Munsiff Court. As per the averments in the plaint, Ext. Al -partition deed stipulates that the plaint schedule property which includes a temple, always remained as 'tharavad' property and it is impartible. The respective 'karanavar' of the tharavad has to 'hold' the property, enjoy the usufructs, administer and manage the temple which includes lighting of lamps, conducting of festival etc. In the light of the recitals in Ex. A1, plaintiffs are entitled to manage the administration of temple, it is contended.

(3.) The plaintiffs also raised a contention that defendants who are close relatives of deceased Balakrishna Pillai are attempting to trespass into the temple premises, with a view too interfere with plaintiffs' right to manage the temple. Defendants are not members of the tharavad. They do not have any interest in the plaint property, though their father was managing the temple and its affairs. Such management and administration was only in the representative capacity, as a representative of the tharavad.