Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. This appeal is filed by the plaintiffs and it arises out of a suit commenced by the plaintiffs through their next friend for a declaration that the compromise decree passed in O. S. 21/1124 of the Anjikaimal District Court is invalid and not binding on the plaintiffs and their Illom and for ancillary reliefs.

2. Plaintiffs 1 to 6 and defendants 3 to 7 are the members of an undivided Namhoodiri illom known as Cheruvally Swaroopam of which 3rd defendant is the karnavan. The 3rd defendant is said to be illiterate, dull headed and incapable of management and the 4th defendant was therefore managing the illom affairs under an udampady Ext. PL The illom owned considerable properties in the Cochin area of the former TC. State. While the fourth defendant was in management the 1st defen-dant was appointed as the manager to look after the illom properties under an unregistered karar Ext P20 dated 4th Edavam 1123.

So defendants 3 and 4 issued a notice on 20-12-1123 terminating his managership and calling upon him to 'render accounts. No accounts were rendered; but the 1st defendant instituted the suit O. S. 21/1124 against the Swaroopam claiming a sum of Rs. 5,250 from the illom. Ext. P4 is the plaint in the suit. Rs. 140 was claimed as arrears of salary and another sum of Rs. 5217-3-0 was claimed as amounts which he had expended for the day to day expenses of the illom, for some medical treatment and for certain other ceremonies.

Ry Ext. P-12 it was agreed that a decree be passed against the plaintiffs and their illom for the plaint amount and costs with future interest to be realized from the assets of the Swaroopam excepting the properties allotted to the 4th defendant in the compromise Ext. P-11 in O. S. 90 of 1951. The plaintiff's case is that this compromise decree is not valid and binding on them, that the decree is highly detrimental to them and their illom, that there was no jurisdiction to withdraw the contentions and permit a decree to be passed and that no benefit had accrued to the minors Or the illom.

6. The 1st defendant contends that the plaintiffs' Swaroopam were in debts, that the members were finding it difficult to manage, huge amounts had to be paid to the creditors and it was at such a juncture that he was appointed manager. His ease is that he had not received any money under the two mortgage documents referred to in the plaint and that for the purposes of management and for the day to day expenses of the illom he had to incur huge expenses and as no amount was available from the funds of the illom he bad to meet the expenses out of his pocket.