✦ High Court of India · 07 Apr 2025

BY AD vs V.N.SANKARJEE

Case Details High Court of India · 07 Apr 2025

Court

High Court of India

Decided

07 Apr 2025

Bench

SATHISH NINAN SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

Length

1,871 words

RESPONDENTS/COUNTER PETITIONERS/PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS 1 TO 12: 1 2 3 HOLI BHADRAKALI (IDOL) OF MUTHUKATTUKARA BHAGAVATHI TEMPLE MUTHUKATTUKARA MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, ANEESH C., S/O CHANDRAN, AGED 38, CHARUVUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUTHUKKATTUKARA MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 ANEESH C., AGED 38 YEARS, S/O CHANDRAN, CHARUVUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUTHUKATTUKARA MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 KRISHNARAJ R., AGED 38 YEARS, S/O LATE RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, DEEPTHI, MUTHUKATTUKARA MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 F.A.O. No.141 of 2024 -: 6 :- 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 SURENDRAN UNNITHAN AGED 57 YEARS, S/O LATE VASUDEVAN PILLAI, MUTHUKATTUKARA VEEDU, MUTHUKATTUKARA MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 GOPALAKRISHNA PANICKER (DIED) AGED 68 YEARS, S/O LATE RAGHAVAN PILLAI, PRABHARAGA SADANAM, MUTHUKATTUKARA MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 BHARGAVAN PILLAI AGED 66 YEARS, S/O LATE SANKARA PILLAI, KADAICHATTU HOUSE, MUTHUKATTUKARA MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 PADANILAM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL PADANILAM P.O., NOORANAD, REPRESENTED BY MANAGER, M. SASIKUMAR (DIED), AGED 48, S/O MADHAVAN NAIR, SOPANAM, EDAPPON MURI, NOORANAD VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT PIN-690529. (DELETED) SASIKUMAR (DIED) AGED 48 YEARS, S/O MADHAVAN NAIR, SOPANAM, EDAPPON MURI, NOORANAD VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690529 (DELETED) GANGADHARAN (DIED) AGED 72 YEARS, S/O PARAMU, POTHOTTIL HOUSE, ERUMAKUZHY MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 (DELETED) VIJAYAN PILLAI AGED 54 YEARS, S/O NARAYANAN NAIR, NELLIPPULIVILAYIL HOUSE, PANAYIL MURI, PALAMEL F.A.O. No.141 of 2024 -: 7 :- 11 12 13 14 15 16 VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 (DELETED) SANIL KUMAR AGED 42 YEARS, S/O SADANANDAN, SANIL BHAVANAM, MUTHUKATTUKARA MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 (DELETED) GOPALAN UNNITHAN (DIED) AGED 56 YEARS, S/O KOCHUNNITHAN, GOPAL BHAVANAM, MUTHUKATTUKARA MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690504. (DELETED) RAMACHANDRA KURUP (DIED) AGED 69 YEARS S/O VASUDEVA KURUP, MANALATHU HOUSE, PALAMEL MURI, NOORANDU VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690504. (DELETED) RAVEENDRAN CHANNAR AGED 67 YEARS S/O SANKARA PANICKER, VALIYATHATTACKATTU HOUSE, EDAPPON MURI, NOORANADU VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 (DELETED) SASIDHARA KARANAVAR AGED 62 YEARS S/O NARAYANAN NAIR, MANACKATTETHU PADEETTATHIL (SREEJA BHAVAN), PULIMEL MURI, NOORANADU VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 (DELETED) MANOJ AGED 37 YEARS S/O BHASKARAN NAIR, REKHA BHAVANAM, NADUVILE MURI, NOORANAD VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, F.A.O. No.141 of 2024 -: 8 :- 17 18 ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 (DELETED) SASIDHARAN PILLAI AGED 53 YEARS, S/O RAGHAVAN PILLAI, KOCHUTHUNDIL THEKKATHIL HOUSE, THATHAMMUNNA MURI, NOORANAD VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690504 (DELETED) SURESH AGED 47 YEARS S/O BHASKARAN KURUP, THUNDUVINAL HOUSE, ULAVAKKAD MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,PIN-690504. (DELETED) IT IS RECORDED THAT RESPONDEDNTS 5,7,8,9,12 & 13 ARE NO MORE. IT IS ALSO RECORDED THAT R5,R7,R8,R9,R12 & R13 WERE IMPLEADED IN THE PROCEEDINGS IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITY AND NO LEGAL HEIRS NEEDS TO BE IMPLEADED VIE ORDER DATED 11/02/2025 IN I.A.1/2025. RESPONDENTS 7 TO 18 ARE DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AS PER THE ORDER DATED 07.04.2025 IN I.A.NO.3 OF 2025. BY ADVS. RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL ASHA ELIZABETH MATHEW(K/1557/2003) NEENA ELISABATH ANTONY(K/000278/2024) THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 07.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SATHISH NINAN & SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = F.A.O. No.141 of 2024 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 7th day of April, 2025 JUDGMENT Sathish Ninan, J. The application filed by the appellants, seeking to set aside the ex parte decree, was dismissed by the trial court, against which this appeal.

2. The reliefs sought for in the suit read thus; “(A). To declare that plaintiff No.1 has title and possession over plaint item Nos.4 & 5. (B). To declare Document No.182/1968 of the S.R.O., Nooranad is null and void and is not binding on the plaintiffs and all other beneficiaries of the trust. (C). To frame a new scheme for the better and effective administration of the plaintiff No.1 and the plaint items, and (D). Further to declare that the executants of the Document No.182/68 of the S.R.O., Nooranad was a trustee of the plaintiff F.A.O. No.141 of 2024 -: 2 :- No.1 and its properties covered under Document No.1316/66 & 1317/66 of the S.R.O., Nooranad.”

3. The appellants are the present elected office bearers of the educational agency of the 1 st defendant school. Since the appellants failed to appear to adduce evidence, they were set ex parte and an ex parte decree was passed.

4. The appellants filed an application, as Restoration Petition No.11 of 2021, seeking to set aside the ex parte decree. The application was allowed on the following conditions: “1. The petitioners/defendants shall pay Rs.3,000/- to the respondents/petitioners within 15 days from today.

2. That apart, the petitioners/defendants shall also pay Rs.3,000/- in the office of the DLSA, Alappuzha directly by cash and produce receipt within 15 days from today.

3. In default of condition numbers 1 and 2 the petition shall stand dismissed. For compliance of terms, call on 06.01.2024.” F.A.O. No.141 of 2024 -: 3 :- Thereafter, the application was dismissed as per order dated 06.01.2023 for non-compliance of the conditions above.

5. We have heard Dr.V.N. Sankarjee, the learned counsel on behalf of the appellants and Shri.Rinny Stephen Chamaparambil, the learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the respondents.

6. As could be noticed from the facts as stated above, while imposing condition of payment of costs, though the cost was ordered to be paid within 15 days, the date for reporting compliance was noted by the court as 06.01.2024. Obviously it was a mistake. The matter was called on 06.01.2023 and the application was dismissed. The order allowing Order IX Rule 13 petition was passed on 21.12.2022. Costs were to be paid within F.A.O. No.141 of 2024 -: 4 :- 15 days. The Courts were closed for Christmas vacation thereafter. The cost was not paid within the 15 days as was ordered.

7. The learned counsel for the appellants expresses the willingness to pay the costs on any day to be fixed by this Court and seeks for an opportunity to have the lis decided on merits.

8. Considering the facts as above, we are of the opinion that the appellants can be granted an opportunity to contest the suit on merits, on adequately compensating the respondents. We are of the opinion that the cost ordered for payment to the respondents is liable to be refixed as Rs.10,000/-, instead of Rs.3,000/-.

9. Resultantly, the appeal is allowed. The order F.A.O. No.141 of 2024 -: 5 :- impugned is set aside. The Restoration Petition No.11 of 2021 will stand allowed subject to the following conditions; (i) The petitioners/defendants shall pay Rs.10,000/- as cost to the counsel appearing for the respondents before this Court on or before 26.05.2025. (ii) The petitioners/defendants shall also pay Rs.3,000/- to the office of the District Legal Services Authority, Alappuzha and produce receipt before this Court on or before

26.05.2025. (iii) On failure to comply with the conditions as above, the appeal will stand dismissed affirming the order of the trial court. F.A.O. No.141 of 2024 -: 6 :- To verify compliance, call on 19.05.2025. Sd/- SATHISH NINAN JUDGE Sd/- SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN JUDGE

2. That apart, the petitioners/defendants shall also pay Rs.3,000/- in the office of the DLSA, Alappuzha directly by cash and produce receipt within 15 days from today.

5. We have heard Dr.V.N. Sankarjee, the learned counsel on behalf of the appellants and Shri.Rinny Stephen Chamaparambil, the learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the respondents.

7. The learned counsel for the appellants expresses the willingness to pay the costs on any day to be fixed by this Court and seeks for an opportunity to have the lis decided on merits.

Find similar cases Start drafting free

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments