IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN TUESDAY, THE 4^th DAY OF JULY 2023 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1945 OP(C) NO. 246 OF 2023 CMA 12/2022 OF SUB COURT, OTTAPPALAM AND I.A.No.3348/2019 IN OS 208/2010 OF MUNSIFF COURT, OTTAPPALAM PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 2 TO 8/RESPONDENTS 2 TO 8/PLAINTIFFS 2 TO 5 & SUPPLEMENTAL PLAINTIFF 7 TO 9 ( 1 s t RESPONDENT/ 1 s t RESPONDENT/ 1 s t PLAINTIFF AND 6 t h PLAINTIFF IS NO MORE):

1 SURENDRAN, AGED 67 YEARS, S/o KUNNINMEL PARUKUTTY AMMA, UMMANEZHI DESOM, PULAPATTA AMSOM AND POST, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678632

2 USHADEVI, AGED 64 YEARS, D/o KUNNINMEL PARUKUTTY AMMA, UMMANEZHI DESOM, PULAPATTA AMSOM AND POST, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678632

3 REMA, AGED 62 YEARS, D/P KUNNINMEL PARUKUTTY AMMA, UMMANEZHI DESOM, PULAPATTA AMSOM AND POST, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678632

4 ASHA HARIDAS, AGED 59 YEARS, D/o KUNNINMEL PARUKUTTY AMMA, UMMANEZHI DESOM, PULAPATTA AMSOM AND POST, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678632

5 USHADEVI, AGED 64 YEARS, W/o LATE BALAKRISHNAN, USHUS, KONIKKAZHI, PULAPATTA AMSOM AND POST, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678632

6 MANJUSHA, AGED 40 YEARS, D/o LATE BALAKRISHNAN, USHUS, KONIKKAZHI, PULAPATTA AMSOM AND POST, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN – 678632

7 MAHESH, AGED 33 YEARS, S/o LATE BALAKRISHNAN, USHUS, KONIKKAZHI, PULAPATTA AMSOM AND POST, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678632 BY ADVS. R.SREEHARI HAMZA A.V.

RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/PETITIONER/DEFENDANT:

COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHEMBUKAVU, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680001 BY ADV. K P SUDHEER, SC THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 04.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Ext.P8 order is under challenge on the ground that it was allowed conditionally on payment of Rs.15,000/-. The suit was instituted in the year 2010. It was dragged unnecessarily by the defendant/Devaswom Board viz., Cochin Devaswom Board, who remained ex parte on two occasions and allowed the plaintiffs to get an ex parte decree. Then they opted to challenge the same in C.M.A. Then also, the very same device was played. Ultimately, it was brought up to this court. Thereon, this court had taken a lenient view in the matter by setting aside the ex parte decree. Thereafter also, the defendant/Cochin Devaswom Board remained absent and allowed to pass yet another ex parte decree. Thereon they preferred a C.M.A., in which Ext.P8 order was passed.

2. Gross negligence on the part of the concerned officials is well evident from the abovesaid facts. Necessarily, it has to be enquired by the Vigilance Officer under the department, for which a copy of this judgment may be placed before the Hon'ble The Chief Justice to pass appropriate order by the Bench dealing with Devaswom matter. The amount of Rs.15,000/- as ordered under Ext.P8 (which was already deposited) and the cost incurred for maintaining applications for setting aside ex parte, for maintaining CMA and this OP shall be recovered from the erring officers at the time of audit of accounts by the Devaswom, besides departmental action for the negligence and laches, which appears to be so grave. The Original Petition will stand dismissed accordingly.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE DMR/-

APPENDIX OF OP(C) 246/2023 PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.208/2010 OF MUNSIFF COURT, OTTAPALAM Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19/12/2018 PASSED IN O.P.(C) NO.2803/2018 BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 27/11/2019 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN, IN SUPPORT OF I.A.NO.3348/2019 IN O.S.NO.208/2010 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, OTTAPALAM Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT /DEFENDANT IN O.S.NO.208/2010 OF MUNSIFF COURT, OTTAPALAM DATED 27/11/2019 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS HEREIN AND THE 1ST PLAINTIFF (PARUKUTTY