Back
K.PADMANABHAN NAIR
Abhaya – Appellant
Versus
J. A. Raheem – Respondent
Counter petitioners 1 to 3, 5 and 7 to 9 in O.P. (Trust) No.129 of 2003, a petition filed under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking leave to file a suit in a representative capacity before the District Court, Thiruvananthapuram are the revision petitioners. This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging an order passed by the I Additional District Judge, Thiruvananthapuram granting leave to the respondents 1 to 6, who were the petitioners therein, to institute a regular suit for the reliefs made in the petition.
2. The 1st petitioner is a Society registered under the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act (Act XII of 1955), hereinafter referred to as "Act XII of 1955" with Registration No.71 of 1986 and having registered office at "Varada", Nandavanam, Thiruvananthapuram. 2nd petitioner is the President and the 3rd petitioner is the Secretary. Petitioners 4 to 8 are office bearers of the 1st petitioner Society. Respondents 1 to 6 filed the petition under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking leave to institute a suit raising various allegations, mainly against the 3rd petitioner-Secretary. It is averr
None of the cases listed explicitly indicate that they have been overruled, reversed, or treated as bad law. The references primarily discuss the case of Raheem (AIR 2005 Kerala 233) and its reliance in subsequent decisions, as well as general observations about trust existence and pleadings. There are no clear indicators within the provided snippets that any case has been explicitly overruled or invalidated by later jurisprudence.
Followed/Supporting Cases:
B. K. Goel and others VS Manohar Lal & Ors - 2011 0 Supreme(Del) 917: Raheem and Ors., AIR 2005 Kerala 233; This case is cited as a precedent and is discussed in relation to its facts and legal principles. The repeated references suggest it is considered a relevant authority, possibly followed or relied upon in subsequent judgments.
Young Mens Christian Association of Ernakulam VS National Council Ymcas of India - 2018 0 Supreme(Del) 1841: Raheem AIR 2005 Ker 233 (hereinafter, ‘Abhaya’); This case is also cited in relation to trust and property issues, indicating its continued relevance and possible supportive role in legal reasoning.
PATHANAPURAM TALUK SAMAJAM VALACODU P.O, PUNALUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT vs K.K.SURENDRAN AGED 67 YEARS, S/O. KUNJU PILLAI - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 53941: trust existence - The case discusses the importance of pleadings and documents in establishing trust, referencing J.A. Raheem and Others, and Abhaya. The context suggests it is citing or relying on prior rulings, rather than criticizing or overruling them.
Distinguished or Clarified Cases:
The references to ‘Abhaya’ in the context of charitable societies and trust property indicate that the case is used to clarify legal principles about trust existence and property held ‘in trust’. There is no indication that these cases have been distinguished as bad law; rather, they are used to elucidate legal points.
Uncertain or Ambiguous Treatment:
The snippets do not provide explicit language about whether these cases have been followed, distinguished, or criticized in subsequent rulings. The absence of such language means their treatment remains uncertain based on the provided data.
All cases listed have treatment descriptions that are either supportive or explanatory, but none explicitly state their subsequent judicial treatment such as being overruled or criticized. Therefore, their treatment remains uncertain without additional context or case law citations.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
