Sivadasan, Asok Kumar and Mohandas vs Sree Narayana Trust and Vellapally Natesan

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.—Respondents appear through Adv.A.N.Rajan Babu. We heard himand the learned senior advocate Sri.S.V.Balakrishna Iyer for the appellants. This appeal is filed against an order by which the court below refused to pass an order of temporary injunction in a suit instituted with leave u/s 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The matter relates to Sree Narayana Trust. The High Court had framed a scheme for that trust in an earlier proceeding. It appears that there is a clause in that scheme which enables any person to approach the High Court for orders in connection with modification of that scheme. The suit instituted before the court below, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondents, is not a matter in connection with the terms of the scheme or its modification. The cause of action appears to be built on the listing of certain items for consideration in a General Body. This is stated to be including proposals to frame or amend rules regarding the conduct of election and other matters. According to the appellants, any such amendment would impinge on clause 34 of the scheme. Therefore, either way, the scheme is not sought to be modified by moving the court below. We are also told that by this time, the Sub Court, Thalasserry had issued an order of temporary injunction, on the basis of which the election now stands deferred.

In the aforesaid view of the matter, there was no need for the court below to have opined that the application for revocation of leave granted u/s 92 being binding and in view of clause 34 of the scheme, proceedings before the court below may not lie. The finding of absence of prima facie case and other ingredients made on the basis of the aforesaid premise also do not require to stand. We, therefore, order that the court below will hear any interlocutory application and the final matter, as also the applications pending before it, including any application seeking revocation of leave, untrammelled by anything stated in the impugned order. It will be open to the appellants to move the court below with any interlocutory application, including for similar reliefs, as may be found available in accordance with law. If the court below is of the view that any interlocutory application could be considered only after considering the application for revocation of leave granted u/s 92, it has to immediately take up that matter and decide on it. The appeal ordered accordingly.