N S RAJESH Vs. PARAMESWARAN NAMBOOTHRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF in O.S. No.32 of 2007 of the court of learned Sub Judge, Perumbavoor is the appellant before me. He filed the suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit property. He claimed that the said property was acquired by his great grand father, Kelan of Nacklikkat family as tax free land. There is a temple in the suit property where the members of the Nacklikkat family used to offer worship. After the death of Kelan, property was inherited by his legal heirs who were performing poojas in the temple. Respondents are poojaries belonging to the Namboothiri Community engaged for conducting poojas in the temple in the suit property. In the year 1983 there were some dispute between the temple committee and the third respondent. That resulted in the temple committee filing O.S. No.596 of 1985 and respondents 1 and 2 filing O.S. No.597 of 1985. Those suits were dismissed as per Ext.B10, judgment dated 29.01.2004. According to the appellant respondents have no right in the suit property. Hence the suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession on behalf of all the members of Nacklikkat family.

(2.) RESPONDENTS contended that appellant or his family has no right or interest in the suit property. Kelan, referred to in the plaint is not the great grand father of appellant nor did Kelan belong to Nacklikkat family. They claimed that suit property belonged to their predecessor-in-interest and by inheritance it devolved on them.

(3.) LEARNED counsel who appeared for the respondents contended that this is the second round of litigation it having started in the year, 1985 which was concluded by Ext.B10, judgment where it is specifically held that members of Nacklikkat family are the descendants of Thattayath Panicker Kumaran Kelan cannot be accepted, and that would cut at the root of the case pleaded by the appellant.