The court ruled that the governing provisions of 'Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana Yogam' necessitate consideration of both Companies Acts and Kerala NTC Act, delegating the ultimate authority to the Government of India for resolution.

JUDGMENT :

Devan Ramachandran , J.

1. Within the labyrinthine pleadings and fasciculous of statutes involved in these cases, rises a short question, whether the “Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana Yogam” (for short 'the Yogam') is a company operating under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and consequently, under the Companies Act, 2013 ; or under the provisions of the Kerala Non-Trading Companies Act, 1961 (for short “the Kerala NTC Act”).

2. We propose to be circumspect and brief in our observations and holdings in these appeals; the reason for it to become manifest presently, as we deal with the matter.

3. There are four appeals before us — all impelled against the judgments of a learned Single Judge of this Court, which decided two writ petitions jointly, namely, WP(C) Nos.8382/2020 and 1385/2021.

4. The afore two writ petitions were filed by the members of 'the Yogam', challenging the validity of the order of the Government of India dated 20.08.1974 (for short 'the impugned order'); while, in one of them, the petitioners also assail Article 44 of the Articles of Association of 'the Yogam'.

5. The projected cause for the writ petitioners, to have approached this Court through the writ petitions, is that, vide the “impugned order”, the Government of India granted exemption to 'the Yogam' from the provisions of Sections 172 (2), 219 and Article 14 of Table C of Schedule I of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short '1956 Act'). The effect of this exemption is that every member of 'the Yogam' do not obtain the right to cast their vote in its General Body meetings, but only their representatives would.

6. It is admitted without dispute, that, consequent to 'the impugned order', 'the Yogam' had amended its Articles of Association, bringing in clause 44 thereof; and thus that the right of every member to cast a vote became denuded.

7. The writ petitioners assert that it was incompetent for the Government of India to have issued the “impugned order” because 'the Yogam' stood, at that time, governed by the “Kerala NTC Act”. For this, they point out that 'the Yogam' itself had held over in the past, that it was so governed; and that the Government of India had, consequently, offered approval to it, through their order dated 23.08.2005.

8. The learned Single Judge allowed both the writ petitions, thus quashing 'the impugned order', as also clause 44 of the Articles of Association, holding that 'the Yogam' is governed solely by “the Kerala NTC Act”, thus finding that the Government of India did not obtain competence to have issued such order; and axiomatically, that clause 44 of the Articles of Association stood incompetent in law.

9. The appellants in WA No.2024/2024 and 2023/2024, thereupon, filed applications for review of the impugned judgment before the learned Single Judge, accompanied by petitions seeking condonation of delay in filing them. However, the petitions were dismissed, refusing the plea for condonation of the delay; but nevertheless holding that the objects of 'the Yogam' — having been originally registered as “Aruvipuram Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana Yogam”, under Travancore Regulation No.1 of 1063 (hereinafter “Travancore Regulations” for ease) — can only be taken to be confined initially to the Travancore area, and thereafter to the territory of the State of Kerala.

10. Two sets of members of 'the Yogam', as also 'the Yogam', have thus filed the afore four appeals (two by the members and two by 'the Yogam'), calling into question the correctness of the findings of the learned Single Judge.

11. We have extensively heard Sri.Santhosh Mathew, learned senior counsel, instructed by Sri.Mathew Nevin Thomas appearing for the appellants in WA Nos.2023/2024 and 2024/2024; Sri.Elvin Peter, learned senior counsel, instructed by Sri.C.S.Adarsh Babu — appearing for the appellants in WA Nos.478/2025 and 482/2025; Sri.A.R.L.Sundaresan, learned Additional Solicitor General of India (ASGI), instructed by Sri.S.Biju and Sri.C.Dinesh — learne