Shri P.S. Poti, learned senior companynsel for the appellant companytends that this Court did number decide the matter on merits.
Ad interim injunction was granted by the learned Sub ordinate Judge, Attingal in O.S. No.247/94 on 22.11 94.
As a companysequence, the High Court cannot review the order.
The S.L.P. is dismissed.
The High Court by judgment dated June 19, 1995 allowed the revision, set aside the order of the appellate authority and gave certain directions.
This appeal, by special leave, arises from the judgment of the Kerala High Court, made on January 16, 1996 in R.P. No.204/95 in C .
since the term of the elected body was to expire on 10.8.94, the Trust Board on 4.7.94 decided to companyduct election on 26.7.94.
When that order came to be challenged, this Court held thus But in this case, when the self same main order was companyfirmed by this Court the question arises whether the Tribunal has had power under Order 47, Rule 1 CPC or any other appropriate provision under the Tribunals Act to review the orders passed by it and companyfirmed by this Court by refusing to grant leave.
The Trust is governed by the scheme framed by the High Court in S. No.14/56, dated March 26, 1959.
Disputes had arisen as to the validity of the elections held on 26.7.94 and the suit came to be filed.
Against the interlocutory order passed by the appellate authority in C.M.A. No.167/94, dated December 2, 1994 C.R.P. No.2727/94 came to be filed.
However, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order.
Leave granted.
The dispute has arisen with regard to the election to the Committee of Sree Narayana Dharmasanghom Trust.
Pending the S.L.P., a review petition was filed in the Tribunal.
Calling that matter in question L.P. C No.13667/95 came to be filed in this Court, This Court on June 29, 1995 passed the following order We do number find any ground warranting interference since it is an individual case and that too by an interim order.
The Tribunal reviewed its order.
2724/94.
Thereafter, an application came to be filed to review the order passed by the High Court in the revision, which had been dismissed by the High Court holding that the order passed by the High Court stood merged with the order of this Court.
Thus this appeal, by special leave.
