Kerala High Court
K. Sugathan vs Diety Installed In Vakkom Puthen ... on 6 March, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
Thursday, the 6th day of March 2025 / 15th Phalguna, 1946
IA.NO.1/2025 IN RFA NO. 205 OF 2016
OS 71/2004 OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL
APPLICANT/24TH RESPONDENT/3RD PLAINTIFF:
G SASEENDRAN AGED 62 YEARS S/O.GOVINDAN, KANNANCHIRA, THODIYIL
VEEDU, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT , PIN -
695308
RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 23 AND 25 TO 28/PLAINTIFF 4 AND 7/
DEFENDANTS 1 TO 21, PLAINTIFFS 1 TO 5,6, AND 8 AND THE COURT RECIEVER:
1. K. SUGATHAN HOUSE NO. 22, AKG NAGAR, AVANAVANCHERRY VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
2. K.CHANDRALAL*[DIED] VENMARAKKAL VEEDU, VAKKOM VILLAGE, VAKKOM P O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
3. S.BINI,AGED 41 YEARS S/O.SIVADASAN, RESIDING AT SUDHANJALI,
VAKKATHUVILAKOM, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST.,
PIN- 695308.
4. K. K.CHANDRARAJ, AGED 63 YEARS S/O.KAMALASANAN, VENMARAKKAL VEEDU,
VAKKOM VILLAGE, VAKKOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST., PIN - 695308.
5. DEITY INSTALLED IN VAKKOM PUTHEN MUKKALUVATTOM BHAGAVATHY TEMPLE
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, R. PRIYADARSI, S/O.RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE,
AGED 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT MANEEKSHA, MELARKAZHIKOM, VAKKOM DESOM
AND VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695308.
6. R PRIYADARSI AGED 48 YEARS S/O.RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE, RESIDING AT
MANEEKSHA, MELARKAZHKOM, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695308
7. A K SAJEEV, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.KUNJAN, COMPANY EMPLOYEE, KUZHIKKANAM
VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE (VICE PRESIDENT)THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN
695308
8. G MANIKUMAR, S/O.GURUDASAN, GOVT.SERVANT, AGED 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT
ARCHANA, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE(SECRETARY), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN 695308
9. PRATHEESAN RAJ, S/O.BABU RAJ, STUDENT, AGED 26 YEARS, RESIDING AT
RAJ BHAVAN, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE,(JOINT SECRETARY)
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695308.
10. AJAYAGHOSH, S/O.MANIDAS, COMPANY EMPLOYEES , AGED 26 YEARS, RESIDING
AT VARIL VEDU, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE(TREASURER)
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695308
11. R PRATHEEP, S/O.RAGHAVAN,AGED 43 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, RESIDING AT
MELARKASHIKOM, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN 695308
12. VEERENDRAN SIMHAN S/O.VAMADEVAN, AGRICULTURIST, AGED 44 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KURUNGINCHIRA, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE(MEMBER)
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695308.
13. S.KOUSALYA AGED 72 YEARS D/O.SEKHARAN, RETIRED GOVERNMENT SERVANT,
RESIDING AT PANIKKAKUDI,VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN 695308
14. S PRASAD AGED 42 YEARS S/O.SUNDARAN, GOVERNMENT SERVANT,AGED 42
YEARS, RESIDING AT VARIL VEEDU, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695308
15. PURUSHOTHAMAN AGED 65 YEARS S/O.VASU, AGED 65 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST,RESIDING AT MEDAYIL PADINJARE VEEDU, VAKKOM DESOM AND
VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695308
16. SUGUNAN S/O.VELAYUDHAN,AGED 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHENGANAKKAL,
VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695308
17. KRISHNAKUMAR, S/O.BABURAJ, AGED 29 YEARS, RESIDING AT BCB MANDIRAM,
VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695308
18. CHANDRA BABU AGED 62 YEARS S/O.GOPALAN, RESIDING AT LALITHA BHAVAN,
POIKAMUKKU,AVANAVANCHERY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695103
19. S BINI S/O.SIVADASAN, AGED 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT SUDHANJALI,
VAKKATHUVILAKOM, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN 695308
20. RAVEENDRAN, S/O.PADMANABHAN, FROM VAKKOM, KUNJALUVILAKOM, NOW
RESIDING AT OOROORKONATHU VEEDU, CHERUKARAM, PULLAYIL,
KODUVAZHANNOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695601
21. SATHYADAS, S/O.NARAYANAN, FROM VAKKOM KUNJALUVILAKOM, NOW RESIDING
AT VIJAYALAYAM, MANIKKAL MURI, NELLANADU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN 695607,(17TH DEFENDANT-DIED AND 21ST DEFENDANT/
RESPONDENT WAS IMPLEADED IN THE COURT BELOW, HE IS IMPLEADED IN THIS
APPEAL AS HIS NAME APPEARS IN THE CAUSE TITLE)
22. MOHANKUMAR S K V MANI S/O.GOPALAN, DWARAKA, MARKET ROAD, ATTINGAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695101
23. PUSHPARAJAN, S/O.NARAYANAN,REMANEEYAM, VAKKOM KUNJALUVILA,VAKKOM
VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695308
24. MUKKALUVATTOM BHAGAVATHI KSHETHRA SAMITHI A SOCEITY REGISTERED UNDER
TRAVANCORE COCHIN LITERARY SCIENTIFIC AND CHARITABLE SOCEITIES ACT,
REPRESENTED THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, G MANIKUMAR, S/O.GURUDASAN,
GOVT.SERVANT, RESIDING AT ARCHANA, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT PIN 695308
25. RADHA AGED 60 YEARS D/O.KRISHNAN, K C NIVAS, VAKKOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695308
26. N SREENIVASAN, S/O.NEELAKANTAN, RETIRED GOVT.SERVANT, AGED 68 YEARS,
RESIDING AT SREEVAS, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-,
DISTRICT, PIN 695308
27. K S SABU S/O.SURENDRAN,BUSINESS MAN, RESIDING AT KANNANCHIRA,
THODIYIL VEEDU, VAKKOM DESOM AND VILLAGE, THIRVUANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN 695308, (2ND PLAINTIFF - DIED AND NO ONE WAS IMPLEADED
IN THE COURT BELOW AS BEING AN ORDER I RULE 8 SUIT, HE IS IMPLEADED
IN THIS APPEAL AS HIS NAME APPEARS IN THE CAUSE TITLE)
28. N HARIHARAN, RESIDING AT GOWRI, KAYIKARA VAKKOM VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695308
29. P SATHYAN, KATTAKKALIL VEEDU,KILIMANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN 695601(ADDL.6TH PLAINTIFF- DIED AND NO ONE WAS
IMPLEADED IN THE COURT BELOW AS BEING AN ORDER I RULE 8 SUIT, HE IS
IMPLEADED IN THIS APPEAL AS HIS NAME APPEARS IN THE CAUSE TITLE)
30. S.JAYARAJ SAMBHU NIVAS, VENMARAKKAL VEEDU, VAKKOM VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 693508
31. G SUSEELAN, ADVOCAT RECEIVER APPOINTED BY THE SUB COURT, ATTINGAL IN
OS NO 71/2004, ADVOCATES COMPLEX, ATTINGAL, THRIUVANANTHAPURAM PIN
695101
Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to grant permission to
the applicant to conduct the annual poojas from 25.03.2025 to 31.03.2025
by hoisting the flag on 25.03.2025, conducting the Pattum Vilakkum for
seven consecutive days commencing from 25.03.2025 to 31.03.2025, offer
Kalam pooja (Pongala), Kuthiyottam, Thaalapoli, Garudanthookam, Arattu,
etc. and the reciever in chaarge may be directed to make necessary
arrangements to enable the petitioner to conduct the aforesaid poojas and
rituals at the expense of the petitioner.
This Application coming on for perusing the application and the
affidavit filed in support thereof, and upon hearing the arguments of
SAIJO HASSAN, NAGARAJ NARAYANAN, BENOJ C AUGUSTIN, RAFEEK. V.K.,
U.M.HASSAN, AATHIRA SUNNY, Advocates for petitioner in IA/ R24 in RFA,
M.R.RAJESH, SANDHYA E.S., Advocates for R1 and R2 in IA/A1 and A2 in RFA ,
ROY THOMAS (MUVATTUPUZHA),K.K.SUBEESH, Advocates for R9 in IA/R5 in
RFA,SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI, Advocate for R11,R12, R15 in IA/R7,R8, R11 in
RFA, SRI.M.DINESH, Advocates for R31 in IA/R28 in RFA, ANIL KUMAR,
Advocate for R13 in IA/R9 in RFA, ASHOK KUMAR, SRI.P.C.GOPINATH, SMT.BINDU
SREEDHAR, SHRI.ASIF N, Advocates for R14 & R17 in IA/R10 & R13 in RFA,
HARIDAS P, BIJU HARIHARAN, SHIJIMOL M.MATHEW, P.C.SHIJIN, RISHIKESH
HARIDAS, Advocates for R18, R20, R22,R25 in IA/R14, R16, R18, R21 in RFA,
N.ASHOK KUMAR, ARJUN S.KURUPP, Advocates for R8 in IA/R4 in RFA, the court
passed the following:
A.BADHARUDEEN,J.
================================
I.A.No.1 of 2025
in
R.F.A.No.205 of 2016
================================
Dated this the 6th day of March, 2025
ORDER
This is an application filed by the petitioner/24 th respondent to grant permission to the petitioner to conduct the annual poojas/festival of the temple from 25.03.2025 to 31.03.2025 by hoisting the flag on 25.03.2025, conducting the Pattum Vilakkum for seven consecutive days commencing from 25.03.2025 to 31.03.2025, offer Kalam Pooja (Ponkala), Kuthiyottam, Thaalapoli, Garudanthookam, Arattu etc. and the Receiver in Charge may be directed to make necessary arrangements to enable the petitioner to conduct the aforesaid poojas and rituals at the expense of the petitioner.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the other parties in this matter. I.A.No.1/2025 in R.F.A.No.205/2016 2
3. Respondent Nos.9 and 29 filed counter affidavit opposing the prayer. The sum and substance of the prayer in this petition could be gathered from paragraphs 5 to 8 as under:
"5. It is submitted that the Temple management is currently under the control of a Court Receiver appointed by the Sub Court. The final decree is yet to be passed. From the date of suit, plaintiffs were permitted to conduct the aforesaid "Pattum Vilakkum" without any change of date by giving appropriate directions to the court receiver at the expenses of plaintiffs in the suit. After the passing of preliminary decree, there has always been confusion regarding the conduct of the Annual Festival and Prathishta Varshikam (Anniversary of e-consecration ceremony) as the rival faction wants to conduct the rituals simultaneously with the anniversary. In the year 2016, we filed an application before the Sub Court for granting permission to conduct the annual festival in the aforesaid manner. The delay caused in hearing the matter by the Court below resulted in a belated order rendering the same infructuous, and the annual festival was cancelled. Similar applications were moved by us in the year 2017 as well, and orders were passed permitting the plaintiffs to conduct the Annual festival and the defendants to conduct the anniversary of Prathishtadinam. Both parties have conducted the celebrations under the supervision of receiver.
6. It is submitted that in the year 2018, I moved an I.A.No.1/2025 in R.F.A.No.205/2016 3 application for permission to conduct the annual festival sufficiently early. But, to my utter dismay, the orders were pronounced on 13.03.2018, when the festival was proposed to start on 14.03.2018. The Court below opined in the Common Order dated 13.03.2018, that a new 'Devapreshnam' is essential to understand the deity's wishes regarding the nature, timings and other disputed issues related to the annual celebrations. Accordingly, Devaprasnam was conducted, and a group of astrologers affirmed that the deity wish to see the festival conducted without any changes, as if it were in the month of 'Meenam".
The defendants disputed the conclusion of astrologers during the course of "Devaprasnam' itself, and the CD's produced by receiver establish the same. Due to this dispute, the astrologers suggested conducting an Aacharyadasasu' to resolve the issue.
7. It is submitted that every year, applications were submitted by both sides for conducting festivals at different times, and restricted orders used to be passed by the trial court. Being dissatisfied with the restrictions and grants, writ petitions from both sides before this court also became a routine affair.
8. It is further submitted that we have every right to conduct the rituals annually without any fail. Last 2 years, for conducting the annual pujas and other functions, we approached this Hon'ble Court with IA No.2/2023, and 4/2023 and the same were allowed by orders dated I.A.No.1/2025 in R.F.A.No.205/2016 4 10.03.2023, 22.02.2024, respectively. This year's annual pujas are scheduled to commence from 25.03.2025 and ends on 31.03.2025, which is the Ashwatinaal in the Malayalam month of Meenam by performing pujas and vows namely Pattum Vilakkum, Kodiyettu, Kalampooja, Kuthiyottam, Thaalapoli, Thookkamand Aarattu for seven consecutive days under the supervision of the court receiver. We are ready to expend the money required without fail. Due to Covid and related issues the celebrations are not conducted during 2020 to 2022.We firmly believe that failing to perform the annual celebration will lead to unpleasant situations for the family members and worshippers, and the entire worshippers are committed to perform the celebrations this year without any fail."
4. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.29, it has been contended that this petition should have been filed before the trial court where the final decree application has been pending. In paragraph Nos.4 and 5 of the counter affidavit, it has been contended as under:
"4. It is humbly submitted that festival of the temple is conducted in Medam i.e., during the month of April/May which is the real festival of the temple. All the rituals annexed to the temple as well as poojas and hoisting of the flag etc. are conducted in Medam festival. After the re-installation ceremony conducted as early as in I.A.No.1/2025 in R.F.A.No.205/2016 5 2003, the Annual Festival is conducted in commemoration of the reinstallation ceremony in Medam (Malayalam Month) However the plaintiffs in the suit are insisting for conducting festival during Meenam which ends on the Aswathy naal in the Malayalam month of Meenam. No such festival is approved by the Tantri ever since the reinstallation of the deity in 2003. So, from 2003 onwards, Meda Karthika festival is conducted in Medom (Malayalam month) only, which is the approved festival as per the oath taken by the Tantri during the installation of the deity of the temple with hoisting of the flag and other rituals like Pattum Vilakkum, Kalam Pooja, Garudan Thookkam, Thalappoli, Kuthiyottam, Kappukettu, Arattu etc. The attempt on the part of the petitioner and their supporters is to shift the annual festival from Medam to Meenam which is not approved by the Tantri who had installed the deity in the temple after consecration and after the renovation of the temple.
5. The earlier idol of the temple was of Goddess Lekshmi but new deity was installed namely Bhadrakali as per the Charth of the Astrologer in the year 2003. The Tantri who installed the present idol was K.P.C. Anujan Bhattathiripad, who had prescribed the Annual Festival as Meda karthika and there is an interdiction in conducting any other festival. The Thanthri Anujan Bhattathiripad died in 2006 and thereafter his brother KPC Vishnu Bhattathiripad has been acting as Thanthri. This Hon'ble I.A.No.1/2025 in R.F.A.No.205/2016 6 Court vide its order dated 30/4/2019 held that what is prescribed by the original Thanthri is to be followed by the existing thanthri. True copy of the order of this Hon'ble Court dated 30.4.2019 in OP(C) No. 1298/2019 is produced herewith and marked as ANNEXURE R29(a)."
5. Somewhat similar objection has been raised in the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.9 and the relevant paragraph Nos.3 to 6 are as under:
"3. It is submitted that after the reinstallation ceremony conducted as early as in 2003, the annual festival is conducted in commemoration of the reinstallation ceremony in May. However, the plaintiffs in the suit are insisting for conducting festival during Meenam which ends on the Aswathy naal in the Malayalam month of Meenam. No such festival is approved by the Tantri ever since the reinstallation of the deity in 2003. The festival of the temple is conducted in Medam i.e., during the month of May which is the real festival of the temple. All the rituals annexed to the temple as well as poojas and hoisting of the flag etc. are conducted in Medam festival. The attempt on the part of the petitioner and their supporters is to shift the annual festival from Medam to Meenam which is not approved by the Tantri who had installed the deity in the temple after consecration and after the renovation of the temple. So, from 2003 onwards, Meda Karthika festival is conducted in May which is the approved festival as per the oath taken by I.A.No.1/2025 in R.F.A.No.205/2016 7 the Tantri during the installation of the deity of the temple with hoisting of the flag and other rituals like Paatum Vilakkum, Kalam Pooja, Garudan Thookam, Thalappoli, Kuthiyottam, Kaappukettu, Aarattu etc. A true copy of the notice publishing Meda Karthika Mäholsavam in 2017 is produced herewith and is marked as Exhibit R9 (a).
4. It is submitted that before reinstallation ceremony in 2003, the idol was Lord Lakshmi and at the time of reinstallation new deity was installed namely Bhadrakali as per the charth of the Astrologer. The Tantri who installed the present idol was KPC Anujan Bhattathiripaad who had prescribed the annual festival as Meda Karthika and there is a interdiction in conducting any other festival. The true copy of the charth issued by the Tantri who installed the new deity in the temple is produced herewith and is marked as Exhibit R9 (b).
5. The Tantri KPC Anujan Bhattathiripaad died in 2006 and thereafter his brother KPC Vishnu Bhattathiripaad has been acting as Tantri. This Hon'ble court vide its order dated 30.04.2019 held that what is prescribed by the original Tantri is to be followed by the existing Tantri. The order of this Hon'ble court dated 30.04.2019 in OP(C) 1298/2019 is produced herewith and maybe is as Exhibit R9 (c), During 2020 also, then Tantri KPC Vishnu Bhattathiripaad issued a detailed Charth prescribing the poojas to be conducted in a year. The true copy of the Charth issued by KPC Vishnu Bhattathiripaad I.A.No.1/2025 in R.F.A.No.205/2016 8 on 04.03.2020 is produced herewith and is marked as Exhibit R9 (d),
6. It is submitted that no festival is allowed by the Tantri during Meenam and the festival of the temple is Medam Karthika Ulsavam which is to be conducted by hoisting the flag and all other connected rituals as stated above. The petitioner or his agents have no right whatsoever to conduct the rituals annually according to their whims and fancies. It is true that the Court below directed to conduct Devaprasnam to understand the wishes of the deity regarding the nature, timings and other issues related to the disputed Meenam Festival. However, the Devaprasnam, though conducted could not conclusively determine the conduct of Meenam festival and therefore the astrologers suggested for conducting Acharya Sadass which is not yet conducted. There is no dispute to this respondent that poojas can be conducted in Meenam as prescribed in the charth of Original Tantri. However, it cannot be converted as a festival since such a festival is not contemplated by the Tantri. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to file this petition to conduct Meenam festival with all these rituals which is in total derogation of the annual festival of the temple approved by the Original Tantri. It is submitted that the plaintiff in the suit as well as their agents have always been trying to unduly influence the Tantris and obtain prescription to conduct Meenam festival but it was objected by the devotees. They are pursuing their evil gains I.A.No.1/2025 in R.F.A.No.205/2016 9 which is to be declined by this Hon'ble court for preserving the ardent faith of the devotees and its deity."
6. The short question that falls for consideration is whether conduct of annual festival proposed to commence from 25.03.2025 and ends on 31.03.2025 during the Malayalam month of `Meenam' in `Aswathi naal' is liable to be allowed or in consideration of the objection raised by respondent Nos.9 and 29, the same is liable to be disallowed holding that the proposal is not authorised by the Thantri?. First of all, it is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, in earlier two occasions, annual festivals during this period were allowed by this Court as per orders in I.A.Nos.2/2023 and 4/2023 as on 10.03.2023 and 22.02.2024. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as per the recent `Charth' given by the present Thantri K.Purushothaman Namboothiri dated 24.11.2024, the festival as proposed is to be conducted and accordingly the petitioner is ready to conduct the festival by his own expenses. This contention is not opposed by the other parties, except respondent Nos.9 and 29. I.A.No.1/2025 in R.F.A.No.205/2016 10
7. Whereas it is submitted by the learned counsel for respondent Nos.9 and 29 that as per the `Charth' given by the earlier Thantri K.P.C Anujan Bhattathiripad dated 28.02.2006 the annual festival was advised during 'Karthika naal' in Malayalam month `Medam'. But the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Thantri K.P.C Anujan Bhattathiripad is no more. The present Thantri is K.Purushothaman Namboothiri. Further after the `Prathishtadinam', despite having festival during Prathistadinam annually, the annual festival for the last 2 years was conducted in `Aswathi naal' of the Malayalam month of `Meenam' and this time also the present Thantri K.Purushothaman Namboothiri gave Charth to do so. In fact, the opinion of the Thantri of the year 2006 could not have predominance in view of the fresh advice given by the present Thantri K.Purushothaman Namboothiri dated 24.11.2024 to conduct the annual festival starting from 25.03.2025 to 31.03.2025. In this petition the prayer of the petitioner is to facilitate conduct of annual festival as proposed, as per the advice given by the present Thantri K.Purushothaman Namboothiri and its I.A.No.1/2025 in R.F.A.No.205/2016 11 expense was agreed to be borne by the petitioner. According to the contesting respondents, the annual festival should be during `Karthika naal' in the Malayalam month of `Medam'. But this contention would not yield because of the fresh advice given by the present Thantri as on 24.11.2024. It is relevant to note that on earlier two occasions this Court permitted festival during the period on `Aswathi naaal' of Malayalam month of `Meenam' and, therefore, the objection at the instance of respondent Nos.9 and 29 raising contentions otherwise and also with attempt to mingle `Prathishtadina varshikam' and `Meda Karthika festival' together during the Malayalam month of `Medam' as stated in Annexure R29(a), counter filed by respondent No.29, would not yield, as they are estopped from doing so, without raising this objection in the earlier occasion. No doubt, annual festival and `Prathishtadina varshikam' are usually on different dates, unless `punaprathishta' of the deity was made on the date or period of annual festival. Therefore, there may be annual festival as usual and `Prathishtadina varshikam' on the said date. Hence the attempt on I.A.No.1/2025 in R.F.A.No.205/2016 12 the part of respondents 9 and 29 in this way cannot be found in their favour. The power of this Court challenged by respondents 9 and 29, in entertaining this petition, also is baseless, since this Court admitted challenge against the preliminary decree and the same has to be decided in this appeal. Therefore, this Court has ample power to grant interim orders in respect of the subject matter. Therefore, the petition is liable to be allowed and it is made clear that conduct of annual festival as proposed as permitted by this Court would not stand in the way of conducting Prathishtadina varshikam during the Malayalam month of `Medam'.
Holding so, this petition stands allowed. The petitioner is permitted to conduct the annual poojas from 25.03.2025 to 31.03.2025 by hoisting the flag on 25.03.2025, conducting the Pattum Vilakkum for seven consecutive days commencing from 25.03.2025 to 31.03.2025, offer Kalam Puja (Ponkala), Kuthiyottam, Thaalapoli, Garudanthookam, Arattu etc. and the Receiver in Charge is directed to make necessary arrangements to enable the petitioner to conduct the aforesaid poojas and rituals at I.A.No.1/2025 in R.F.A.No.205/2016 13 the expense of the petitioner in harmonious manner.
Sd/-
A. BADHARUDEEN, JUDGE
rtr/
06-03-2025 /True Copy/ Deputy Registrar