Dismissed

Pazhanchery Gopi v. Pazhanchery Unnikrishnan

Kerala HC24 Aug 2022OP(C)/4115/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of several civil original petitions invoking Article 227 jurisdiction regarding temple trusteeship. The Court observed that O.S.No.709 of 2013 had already been decreed in favour of one petitioner, declaring him the hereditary trustee. The Court dismissed the petitions as infructuous without deciding the legal or factual contentions.

What did the court decide?

The original petitions were dismissed as infructuous without expressing any opinion on the legal and factual contentions raised by the parties.

Pazhanchery Gopi Vs Pazhanchery Unnikrishnan — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 2ND BHADRA, 1944
OP(C) NO. 2416 OF 2014

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.09.2014 IN I.A.NO.709 OF 2013
IN O.S.NO.709 OF 2013 OF SUB COURT, CHAVAKKAD

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

UNNIKRISHNAN
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O.KARTHIYANI AMMA, PAZHANCHERY HOUSE,
PUTTEKKARA DESOM, ANJOOR VILLAGE.

¶10

BY ADV SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 COMMISSIONER, HR & CE ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE - 673 020

¶13

2 ASST. COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS & CULTURAL ENDOWMENT, ADMN. DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD, PRESENTLY MALAPPURAM676505

¶14

3 NARAYANA MENON, AGED 37 YEARS S/O.PUTHIYEDATH KUNHILAKSHMI AMMA, OORAKAM DESOM, ANNAKARA AMSOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK – 691 001

¶15

4 PARUKUTTY AMMA, AGED 36 YEARS D/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHY AMMA, -DO-

¶16

5 KANJIKAVU AMMA, AGED 76 YEARS D/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHY AMMA, -DO-

¶17

-2-

¶18

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶19

6 THANKAMMA, AGED 63 YEARS D/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHY AMMA, -DO-

¶20

7 COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, KOZHIKODE – 673 001.

¶21

8 GOPI NAIR, AGED 64 YEARS S/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHI AMMA, OORAKAM DESOM, ANNAKARA AMSOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK – 691 001

¶22

9 P. RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 67 YEARS S/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHY AMMA, -DO-

¶23

BY ADVS.SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY
SRI.LEGITH T.KOTTAKKAL
SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN, SC, MALABAR DEVASWOM
BOARD
K.R.SUNIL, SC, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD
SRI.S.VINOD BHAT

¶24

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.08.2022, ALONG WITH OP(C).2861/2013 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

-3-

¶26

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶27

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶28

PRESENT

¶29

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶30

¶31

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 2ND BHADRA, 1944

¶32

OP(C) NO. 1570 OF 2014

¶33

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.05.2014 IN I.A.NO.721 OF 2014
IN O.S.NO.709 OF 2013 OF SUB COURT, CHAVAKKAD

¶34

PETITIONER:

¶35

PAZHANCHERY UNNIKRISHNAN
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O.KARTHIYANI AMMA, PAZHANCHERY HOUSE,
PUTTEKKARA DESOM, ANJOOR VILLAGE.

¶36

BY ADVS.SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR
SRI.V.G.ARUN NEYYATTINKARA
SRI.BIJI MATHEW
SMT.V.JAYA RAGI
SMT.LAKSHMI.N.KAIMAL
SRI.P.VISHNU PAZHANGANAT

¶37

RESPONDENTS:

¶38

1 COMMISSIONER, HR & CE ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT CIVIL STATION, KOZHIODE-673 020.

¶39

2 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS & CULTURAL ENDOWMENT, ADM.DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD, PRESENTLY MALAPPURAM676 505.

¶40

3 NARAYANA MENON, AGED 37 YEARS S/O.PUTHIYEDATH KUNHILAKSHMI AMMA, OORAKAM DESOM, ANNAKARA AMSOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK.

¶41

4 PARUKUTTY AMMA, AGED 36 YEARS D/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHY AMMA, -DO-

¶42

-4-

¶43

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶44

5 KUNJIKAVU AMMA, AGED 76 YEARS D/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHY AMMA, -DO-

¶45

6 THANKAMMA, AGED 63 YEARS D/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHY AMMA, -DO-

¶46

7 COMMISSIONER, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD, KOZHIKODE – 673 006.

¶47

8 GOPI NAIR, AGED 64 YEARS S/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHY AMMA, OORAKAM DESOM, ANNAKARA AMSOM, CHAVAKKAD TALUK.

¶48

9 P.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 67 YEARS D/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHY AMMA, -DO-

¶49

BY ADVS.SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN, SC, MALABAR
DEVASWOM BOARD
SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY
SRI.H.KIRAN
SRI.LEGITH T.KOTTAKKAL
SRI.SUJITHKUMAR
SRI.PARTHASARATHY.B, SC, MALABAR DEVASWOM BOARD
SRI.MAHESH V.RAMAKRISHNAN, SC, MALABAR DEVASWOM
BOARD

¶50

SRI.S.VINOD BHAT
SRI.E.VIJIN KARTHIK

¶51

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.08.2022, ALONG WITH OP(C).2861/2013 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶52

-5-

¶53

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶54

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶55

PRESENT

¶56

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶57

¶58

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR

¶59

WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 2ND BHADRA, 1944
OP(C) NO. 2861 OF 2013

¶60

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.06.2013 IN I.A.NO.720 OF 2011
& I.A.NO.1715 OF 2011 IN O.S.NO.1310 OF 2006 OF THE FIRST
ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THRISSUR

¶61

PETITIONER/3RD DEFENDANT:

¶62

NARAYANA MENON

¶63

S/O.PUTHIYEDATH KUNJULAKSHMI AMMA,OORAKAM
DESOM,ANAKARA AMSOM,PATHIYARKULANGARA
P.O,CHAVAKKAD THALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT

¶64

BY ADV SRI.M.PREMCHAND

¶65

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENT 1 TO 4 & 6 TO 8:

¶66

1 PAZHANCHERY UNNIKRISHNAN
AGED 52 YEARS
S/O.KARTHYAYANIAMMA,RESIDING IN PAZHANCHERY
VEEDU,PUTTEKARA DESOM,ANJOORU VILLAGE,TALAPPILLY
THALUK 680 541

¶67

2 JANARDHANAN NAIR (DIED),
S/O.PAZHANCHERY KARTHYAYANIAMMA,OORAKAM
DESOM,ANKARA AMSOM,CHAVAKKAD THALUK,OORAKAM
DESOM,ANAKARA AMSOM,CHAVAKKAD THALUK 680 508

¶68

3 PAZHANCHERY GOPI
S/O.DEVAKY AMMA,RESIDING AT PAZHANCHERY
VEEDU,OORAKAM DESOM,ANAKARA
AMSOM,CHAVAKKAD,PATHIYARKULANGARA P.O,THRISSUR
DISTRICT 680 552

¶69

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶70

-6-

¶71

4 COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT ADMINISTARATION DEPARTMENT,MALAPPURAM 676 505

¶72

5 ASST.COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT ADMINISTARATION DEPARTMENT,MALAPPURAM 676 505

¶73

6 PARUKUTTYAMMA D/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHIAMMA,OORAKAM DESOM,ANAKARA AMSOM,PATHIYARKULANGARA P.O,CHAVAKKAD THALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 552

¶74

7 KUNJIKAVAMMA D/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHIAMMA,OORAKAM DESOM,ANAKARA AMSOM,PATHIYARKULANGARA P.O,CHAVAKKAD THALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 552

¶75

8 THANKAMMA

¶76

D/O.PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHIAMMA,OORAKAM
DESOM,ANAKARA AMSOM,PATHIYARKULANGARA
P.O,CHAVAKKAD THALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 552

¶77

BY ADVS.SRI.R.LAKSHMINARAYAN, SC, MDB
SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON, SC, MDB
SRI.S.VINOD BHAT
SRI.LEGITH T.KOTTAKKAL
JAMSHEED HAFIZ
SAJU.S.A

¶78

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.08.2022, ALONG WITH OP(C).4115/2013, 1570/2014 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶79

-7-

¶80

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶81

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶82

PRESENT

¶83

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶84

¶85

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR

¶86

WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 2ND BHADRA, 1944

¶87

OP(C) NO. 4115 OF 2013

¶88

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.06.2013 IN I.A.NO.720 OF 2011
& I.A.NO.1715 OF 2011 IN O.S.NO.1310 OF 2006 OF THE FIRST
ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THRISSUR

¶89

PETITIONER/2ND RESPONDENT:

¶90

PAZHANCHERY GOPI, S/O. DEVAKY AMMA, RESIDING AT
PAZHANCHERY VEEDU, OORKAM DESOM, ANAKARA AMSOM,
CHAVAKKAD, PATHIYARKULANGARA.P.O., THRISSUR
DISTRICT.

¶91

BY ADV SRI.RAJIT

¶92

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1,3 TO8:

¶93

1 PAZHANCHERY UNNIKRISHNAN, AGED 52 YEARS
S/O. KARTHYAYANIAMMA, RESIDING IN PAZHANCHERY
VEEDU, PUTTEKARA DESOM, ANJOORU VILLAGE,
TALAPPILLY TALUK-680541.

¶94

2 JANARDHANAN NAIR
(DIED), S/O. PAZHANCHERY KARTHYAYANIAMMA,
ORRAKAM DESOM, ANKARA AMSOM CHAVAKKAD TALUK,
PATHIYARKULANGARA-680552.

¶95

3 NARAYANA MENON
S/O. PUTHIYEDATH KUNJULAKSHMI AMMA, OORAKAM
DESOM, ANKARA AMSOM, PATHIYARKULANGARA P.O.
CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR-680552.

¶96

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶97

-8-

¶98

4 COMMISSIONER

¶99

HINDU RELIGIOUS & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT ADMINSTRATION DEPARTMENT, KOZHIKODE-673020.

¶100

5 ASST. COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, MALAPPURAM-676505.

¶101

6 PARUKUTTYAMMA
D/O. PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHIAMMA, OORAKAM DESOM,
ANKARA AMSOM, PATHIYARKULANGARA, CHAVAKKAD
TALUK, THRISSUR-680552.

¶102

7 KUNJIKAVAMMA, D/O. PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHIAMMA, OORAKAM DESOM, ANKARA AMSOM , PATHIYARKULANGARA PO, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR-680552.

¶103

8 THANKAMMA,D/O. PAZHANCHERY MEENAKSHIAMMA, OORAKAM DESOM, ANKARA AMSOM, PATHIYARKULANGARA PO, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR-680552.

¶104

BY SRI.LAKSHMINARAYAN, SC, MDB ADV S.VINOD BHAT

¶105

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.08.2022, ALONG WITH OP(C).2861/2013 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶106

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶107

-9-

¶108

JUDGMENT

¶109

Anil K. Narendran, J.

¶110

Since common issue is raised in these original petitions, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

¶111

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014:- The petitioner, who is the supplemental 2^nd plaintiff in O.S.No.709 of 2013 on the files of the Sub Court, Chavakkad, has filed this original petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking an order to set aside the order dated 30.09.2014 of the Sub Judge, Chavakkad in I.A.No.709 of 2013 in O.S.No.709 of 2013.

¶112

2.1. On 23.10.2014, when this original petition came up for admission, it was brought to the notice of this Court that the issue regarding identity of the person, who is impleaded in O.S.No.709 of 2013 vide Ext.P26 order in I.A.No.709 of 2013, which is under challenge in this original petition, is pending consideration of this Court in O.P.(C)No.1570 of 2014. Therefore, this matter was ordered to be listed along with the said original petition.

¶113

-10-

¶114

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶115

O.P.(C)No.1570 of 2014:- The petitioner, who is the supplemental 2^nd plaintiff in O.S.No.709 of 2013 on the files of the Sub Court, Chavakkad, has filed this original petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking an order to set aside the order dated 22.05.2014 of the Sub Judge, Chavakkad in I.A.No.721 of 2014 in O.S.No.709 of 2013. The petitioner has also sought for an order to aside the order dated 21.06.2014 of the Sub Judge, Chavakkad in I.A.No.1084 of 2014 in I.A.No.721 of 2014 in O.S.No.709 of 2013.

¶116

3.1. On 11.07.2014, when this original petition came up for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file. The learned Government Pleader took notice for respondents 1 and 2 and the respective counsel took notice for respondents 7 and 9. This Court issued urgent notice by speed post to respondents 3 to 6 and 8. In the said order, this Court observed that O.P.(C)No.1252 of 2014 filed by the 6^th respondent against Ext.P46 order on the same issue has been dismissed as withdrawn and there is no sufficient ground to stay the operation of Ext.P48 order in the light of the decision

¶117

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶118

-11-

¶119

of the Apex Court in Narayan Dutt Tiwari v. Rohit Shekhar [(2012) 12 SCC 554].

¶120

O.P.(C)No.2861 of 2013:- The petitioner, who is the 3^rd defendant in O.S.No.1310 of 2006 has filed this original petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking an order to set aside Ext.P2 order dated 21.06.2013 of the First Additional Sub Judge, Thrissur in I.A.No.720 of 2011 and I.A.No.1715 of 2011 in O.S.No.1310 of 2006.

¶121

O.P.(C)No.4115 of 2013:- The petitioner, who is the additional plaintiff in O.S.No.1310 of 2006 on the file of the Subordinate Judges Court, Thrissur, has filed this original petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking an order to set aside Ext.P3 order dated 21.06.2013 of the First Additional Sub Judge, Thrissur in I.A.No.720 of 2011 and I.A.No.1715 of 2011 in O.S.No.1310 of 2006.

¶122

5.1. On 21.11.2013, when this original petition came up for admission, this Court noticed that the order challenge in this original petition is already under challenge in O.P.(C)No.2861 of 2013 and therefore this matter was ordered to be listed along with that original petition.

¶123

-12-

¶124

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶125

On 19.12.2013, when the above original petitions came up for consideration along with O.P.(C)Nos.11029 and 27628 of 2012 and connected cases, this Court passed the following order;

¶126

“Heard the learned counsel appearing for various parties. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the Malabar Devaswom Board that an important festival is scheduled to be conducted on 24^th and 25^th of this month and that proper arrangements will have to be made for the same and, therefore, the Board may be permitted to do so. It is pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel Sir.T.Krishnan Unni that if at all any arrangement is necessary, this Court can appoint an Advocate Commissioner for the conduct of the festival. In the light of the above, we accept the above suggestion. As agreed to by the learned counsel on both sides, we appoint Sri.ASP Kurup, Advocate of this Court, as Advocate Commissioner for the smooth conduct of the festival. The Advocate Commissioner will be free to utilize the funds of the temple for meeting the expenses of the festival. All the parties will co-operate with the Advocate Commissioner for the smooth conduct of the festival. If any assistance is needed from any of the officers of the Malabar Devaswom Board, the Advocate Commissioner can make a written request to the Devaswom Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board, who will be free to send any officer to assist the

¶127

-13-

¶128

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶129

Advocate Commissioner. We fix the remuneration of the Advocate Commissioner at Rs.20,000/-, which will be paid by the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.11029 of 2012. After the conduct of the festival, the Advocate Commissioner will file a report before this Court.”

¶130

On 07.07.2014 when the above matters came up for

¶131

consideration, this Court passed the following order;

¶132

“The learned Advocate Commissioner has submitted a report before this court, wherein in the final portion, it is submitted that the temple requires immediate and urgent repairs. We direct the Executive Officer of the Malabar Devaswom Board to prepare an estimate and submit the same before this court within two weeks. We are of the view that in view of the serious position explained by the Commissioner, urgent repairs will have to be done. This will be without prejudice to the contentions of either of the parties.”

¶133

On 21.07.2022, when the above matters came up

¶134

for consideration, this Court passed the following order;

¶135

“The learned Advocate Commissioner has filed a report. One of the aspects pointed out in the report is with regard to the urgent repairs that may have to be done in the temple. various suggestions had come during the last occasion. It was suggested that the Executive Officer of the temple may be directed to prepare an estimate and submit before this Court.

¶136

The learned Standing Counsel for the Malabar

¶137

-14-

¶138

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶139

Devaswom Board submits that as of now there is no Executive Officer functioning in the temple. the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.11029/2012 submits that his client is prepared to sped the entire amount for the repairs and he will not claim any special right, if permission is granted to do the work under the supervision of the Commissioner.

¶140

We permit the learned Advocate Commissioner to conduct the repairs for which, the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.11029 of 2012 will meet the expenditure.”

¶141

On 01.09.2014, when the above matters came up

¶142

for further consideration, the learned Advocate Commissioner submitted that in tune with the interim order passed by this Court, efforts are being taken to conduct repair works and he sought time to file a report.

¶143

Today, when these original petitions are taken up consideration, it is brought to the notice of this Court that O.S.No.709 of 2013 on the file of the Sub Court, Chavakkad has already been decreed in favour of the supplemental 2^nd plaintiff, namely Pazhancherry Unnikrishnan. The operative portion of that order reads thus;

¶144

“a) It is declared that the Order No.A4-1715/98 dated

¶145

-15-

¶146

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶147

13.06.1998 passed by the second defendant is void and it is not binding on the supplemental plaintiff No.2 for defeating his status as the present hereditary trustee of the Sree Pathiyarkulangara Bagavathy Temple.

¶148

b) It is declared that the Order No.R.P.11/98 dated 31.12.1998 passed by the first defendant is void and it is not binding on the supplemental plaintiff No.2.

¶149

c) It is declared that the 3^rd defendant or 10^th defendant are not the hereditary trustees of Sree Pathiyarkulangara Bagavathy Temple.

¶150

d) It is declared that the present hereditary trustee of Sree Pathiyarkulangara Baghavathy Temple being the eldest Mootha Nair of the Pazhanchery tharvad is Unnikrishnan, who is the supplemental second plaintiff.

¶151

e) The prayer of declaration of death of P. Radhakrishnan Nair is disallowed as the said issue is deleted.

¶152

f) The supplemental second plaintiff is entitled to recover the costs of the proceedings from the 10^th defendant who contested the suit.”

¶153

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that in view of the disposal of O.S.No.709 of 2013, nothing survives in these original petitions. Therefore, the original petitions may be dismissed as infructuous.

¶154

The learned Standing Counsel for Malabar Devaswom Board would point out the pendency of O.A.No.42 of 2006 before the Deputy Commissioner, Kozhikode.

¶155

O.P.(C)No.2416 of 2014 and con.cases

¶156

-16-

¶157

In such circumstances, based on the above submissions, these original petitions are dismissed as infructuous, without expressing anything on the legal and factual contentions raised by both sides.

¶158

Sd/-

¶159

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶160

Sd/-

¶161

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE

¶162

AV/27/8

Pazhanchery Gopi v. Pazhanchery Unnikrishnan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pazhanchery Gopi v. Pazhanchery Unnikrishnan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Ramesh Vs State of Kerala

Beenasarasan, Vs State of Kerala

Suo Motu Vs the Travancore Devaswom Board

Matha Saw Mill Vs Cochin Devaswom Board

E P Anilkumar Vs the State of Kerala

Muthuraman.S Vs James Varghese