P K VASUDEVAN PILLAI Vs. MANIKANDAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Mr.Parameswaran Pillai and Damodaran Pillai jointly filed a suit in O.S.No.121 of 1994 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Padmanabhapuram against one Manikandan Nair and Manmadan, praying for a decree of declaration of their right to administer a temple known as "Badrakaliamman Temple" and for a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs' right to administer the temple and the properties comprised in Schedules 'A' and 'B' to the plaint. The said suit was taken up along with two other suits in O.S.Nos.324 of 1996 and 145 of 1998 by the Trial Court. In the meantime, during the pendency of the suit O.S.No.121 of 1994, the first plaintiff Parameswaran Pillai died and his legal heir P.Madhavan Pillai was impleaded as the third plaintiff. But later he also died.

(2.) One Mr.P.Sundareswaran Nair was impleaded as the fourth plaintiff and in addition to the two defendants, who were originally made parties, 24 others were additionally impleaded as defendants.he registration of an institution for the management and administration of the suit temple, was an illegal act, the appellants have filed a writ petition in W.P.No.1727 of 2005, challenging the proceedings of the Sub Registrar. This is how, we have on hand, a Second Appeal, a Contempt Petition and a Writ Petition and all of them were taken up together for disposal.

(3.) I have heard Mr.D.Rajagopal, learned counsel appearing for the appellants in the second appeal and the petitioners in the Contempt petition and the writ petition. I have also heard Mr.K.Sreekumaran Nair, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-3 to 13 in the Second Appeal, who support the case of the appellants in the second appeal and Mr.S.S.Sundar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 15 to 26, who are the contesting parties in the second appeal.