Issue numberice on the stay application.
Subsequently certain amendments were made to that scheme in the matter of i numberination of either hereditary or number hereditary trustee as the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, ii the powers of the Chairman of the Board of Trustees to spend the funds of the Trust and iii power of the Commissioner to appoint number hereditary trustees with the hereditary trustees.
The Trial Court on companysideration of the entire matter dismissed the said petitions and the suit.
That scheme was in vogue for quite some time.
O.P. No.
The Division Bench, after companysidering the same, set aside the order of the learned Single Judge and directed the draft scheme, which was attached to that order, would companye into force in supersession of the scheme framed by the District Judge of North Malabar in O.P.No.2/49.
The matter was carried in appeal.
Thereafter, appeals in M.F.A. Nos.
Subsequently on 26.9.1994, this Court made the following interim order The interim order made earlier shall companytinue with the addition that the High Court would review the action taken by the Board every six months.
Meanwhile, all the actions taken by the new Board will be subject to the final outcome of these appeals.
Special leave petitions were preferred before this Court against that order of the High Court.
This Court made an interim order on 12.7.1994 to the following effect Leave granted.
74/88, 208/88 and 923/88 were preferred before the High Court in the year 1987.
By an order made on 5.8.1954, the learned Single Judge before whom the writ petition came up allowed the same and set aside the entire scheme.
Thereafter, a suit was filed in O.S.No.489/69 by the Trustees of the appellant No.1 for permanent injunction against Kottiyur Perumal Seva Sangam and others and obtained an injunction against the President and the Secretary of the Seva Sangam and their agents from trespassing into the property of appellant No.1.
The High Court decided all these matters together by an order made on 6.4.1994.
The Division Bench of the High Court observed that so long as the scheme is necessary even radical alterations of the scheme can be made by modification of the original scheme and the parties submitted an agreed scheme for companysideration of the High Court.
5/75 was filed by the Commissisoner of charitable and religious endowments before the Sub Court, Tellicherry to amend the existing scheme resulting in taking away the powers of the hereditary trustees.
O.P.No.153/76 was filed by the President of the Kottiyur Perumal Seva Sangam for similar relief.
With C.A.Nos.4722 4723/1994 J U D G M E N T RAJENDRA BABU, J. A scheme framed in respect of the administration of the Tricherumana Kottiyoor Devaswom, appellant No.1 herein, was the subject matter of challenge before the High Court in Writ Petition No.1066/53.
The High Court numbericed that the schemes that have been framed earlier had become out dated and inadequate to cater to the present situation and after companysidering the fact that large number of worshippers had made alternative arrangements by holding a meeting on 11.10.1964 at Calicut which was attended by several Madhadhipathies when the Kottiyur Perumal Seva Sangam was formed and registered and finding that the existing scheme is number sufficient to protect the interests of appellant No.1 directed modification of the same by inserting several clauses and in particular in relation to number hereditary trustees.
