RADHA Vs. SADASIVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) These two intra-court appeals arise from an appeal and cross objection which arose from the dismissal of a suit filed for declaration, recovery of possession and mandatory injunction. The suit was instituted by two persons with permission having been granted under Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The action was levied before the trial court, purportedly on behalf of the Hindu Brahmins residents of Pallippuram Village in Palakkad District. However, the sum and substance of the suit was for relief of declaration that the plaint A schedule property belongs to Pallippuram Lakshminarayana Devaswom and that it does not belong to Pallippuram Grama Samooham. The other reliefs sought for were consequential.

(3.) The aforenoted Devaswom is an entity, in the form of an institution, which has all the colours of trust. It is a resultant trust. If it is on behalf of a community, and; going by the manner in which the pleadings are placed by the plaintiffs before the trial court; the suit ought to have been either on behalf of a deity or if proper reliefs are claimed in terms of Section 92 of CPC in relation to management and securing the properties, it should have gone under Section 92 of CPC.