Petitioners challenged the appointment of a Commissioner pending a fresh election. The Court directed the District Court to decide stay applications in the connected C.M.A. and suspended the trial court's order for seven days.
Directed District Court to pass appropriate orders on C.M.A. stay applications; trial court order stayed for seven days.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/19TH MAGHA, 1937
OP(C).No. 193 of 2016 (O)
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OS 557/2015 of PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF,ALAPPUZHA
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONERS/COUNTER PETITIONERS 4,5 7 6/DEFENDANTS 4,5 & 6:
1. RAJU APSARA AGED 55 YEARS APSARA JEWELLERY, K.P.ROAD, CHARAMMOODU.
2. V.SABIL RAJ AGED 50 YEARS PADMA, MULLACKAL P.O., ALAPPUZHA.
3. JACOB JOHN AGED 55 YEARS JACOB JOHN AND COMPANY, KAITHAVANA JUNCTION KALARCODE P.O., ALAPPUZHA.
BY ADVS.SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR
SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR SMT.T.J.SEEMA SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN SMT.SMITHA PHILIPOSE SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN (SR.)
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS/PLAINTIFFS/DFENDANTS 1,2,3 & 7 TO 18:
1. VIAYAKUMAR, AGED 43 YEARS
2. SURESH, AGED 45 YEARS S/O. SANKARAN, PUTHIYAVEETTIL, EVOOR P.O. CHEPPAD, KARTHIKAPALLY, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690507.
3. SAKEER HUSSAIN, AGED 39 YEARS S/O. POOKUNJU, PADIPPURACKAL VEEDU, COURT JUNCTION MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690101
4. SANTHOSHKUMAR
S/O. PANKAJAKSHAN PILLAI, SANTHOSH BHAVANAM THEKKEKARA P.O., VANGONDU, KUTTANADU ALAPPUZHA-690107.
5. VENUGOPAL, AGED 45 YEARS S/O. THANKAPPAN, VADAKKECHALIL, THRIKKATTUKULAM CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688524.
(contd.....2)
6. KERALA VYAPARI VYAVASAI EKOPANA SAMITHI REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PRESIDENT, T.NASARUDHEEN KSVVS, VYAPARA BHAVAN, BANK ROAD KALATHINKUNNU AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK PIN-673001.
7. DEVARAJAN
8. KERALA VYAPARI VYAVASAYI EKOPANA SAMITHI DISTRICT COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT NUJUMUDEEN, VYAPARA BHAVAN, THIRUVAMBADY P.O. ALAPPUZHA-688002.
9. VARGHESE VALYACKAL, AGED 57 YEARS VALYACKAL JEWELLERS, CHAMPAKULAM P.O. ALAPPUZHA-688505.
10. K.S.MUHAMMED, AGED 55 YEARS ALLEPPEY WEDCENTRE, ZERO JUNCTION, ALLEPPEY-688002.
11. PRATHAPAN SURYALAYAM, AGED 45 YEARS SWAMEES ELECTRICALS, THOTTAPPALLY P.O., THOTTAPPALLY ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688561.
12. THOMAS KANDAMCHERRY, AGED 49 YEARS KANDAMCHERRY, KOMANA, AMBALAPPUZHA ALAPPUZHA-688561.
13. R.SUBHASH, AGED 45 YEARS ASHTAMUDI, NEAR YMCA, ALAPPUZHA-688011.
14. U.C.SHAJI, AGED 52 YEARS UDAYA MANDIRAM, CHANTHIROOR P.O. ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688537.
15. P.C.GOPALAKRISHNAN, AGED 55 YEARS RAJESH JEWELLERY, THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA P.O. THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA-690515.
16. BABUJI, AGED 57 YEARS JAI HIND, JAI HIND DUTY PAID SHOP, NEAR KSRTC STATION CHENGANNUR, PIN-689121.
17. SAJU PARTHASARATHY, AGED 40 YEARS PARTHASARATHY AGENCIES, PADINJARE NADA, AMBALAPPUZHA ALAPPUZHA-688561.
18. MANIKUTTAN, AGED 40 YEARS ELITE ELECTRICAL, K.P.ROAD, CHARAMMOODU ALAPPUZHA-690101.
19. MUJEEB REHMAN, AGED 39 YEARS ATLAS JEWELLERY, AMBALAPPUZHA JUNCTION, AMBALAPPUZHA ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688561.
(contd......3)
20. GOPAKUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS TRAVEL PIONT ASSOCIATES, THAZHAVA JUNCTION, PALLIKKAL ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690503.
R1 -R 5 BY ADV. SRI.T.KRISHNANUNNI (SR.) R1 -R 5 BY ADV. SRI.K.SHAJ R1 -R 5 BY ADV. SRI.RENJIT GEORGE R9-R20 BY ADV. SRI.K.S.BHARATHAN R9-R20 BY ADV. SMT.S.ANJUSHA
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
avk
OP(C).No. 193 of 2016 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
avk
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.
O.P.(C).No. 193 of 2016
Dated this the 8th day of February, 2016
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are defendants 4 to 6 in O.S.No.557/2015. The respondents are the plaintiffs and co-defendants. They are members of Kerala Vyapari Vyavasayi Ekopana Samithi. An election was conducted on 9.6.2015, in which the petitioners were elected as Office bearers of the Samithi. The plaintiffs challenged validity of the order in the suit. On the application filed by them, the Court found that prima facie, the election was void and it issued a temporary prohibitory injunction. It also appointed an Advocate to supervise a fresh election. In this O.P the appointment of the Commissioner is challenged.
O.P.(C).No. 193 of 2016 2
appointing the Commissioner is a dependent order. So, if the Appellate Court stays the order of injunction, the order appointing the Commissioner will naturally be not implemented. In this circumstances, it is only proper for this Court to direct the Appellate Court to pass appropriate orders on the interim applications filed in CMA.
Sd/-
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
JUDGE
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
avk
O.P.(C).No. 193 of 2016 3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order appointing a Commissioner in an election dispute is a dependent order requiring stay if the injunction is challenged via C.M.A.
RAJU APSARA
VIAYAKUMAR
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
