In disputes over charitable society management, a suit for injunction must include a declaratory relief to establish the validity of elected office bearers; otherwise, it is not maintainable.

JUDGMENT

These appeals arise from the common judgment in O.S. Nos.915 of 2018 and 837 of 2019 on the files of the Principal Munsiff Court, Nedumangad and in A.S. Nos.26 and 27 of 2023 on the files of the Sub Court, Nedumangad. The appellants in R.S.A No.468 of 2025 are the plaintiffs in O.S. No.915 of 2018, and the appellants in R.S.A No.463 of 2025 are the defendants 2 and 3 in O.S. No.837 of 2019. The dispute in the present appeals pertains to the management of a charitable society by name Viswadarshini Charitable Society (the society, for short) registered under the provisions of the Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act , 1955. O.S. No.915 of 2018 was instituted for an injunction restraining the defendants from interfering into the affairs of the society. In the said suit, the plaintiffs claimed that the 2nd plaintiff is the validly elected President of the society and the 3rd plaintiff, his son, is the Secretary of the society. In the other suit, O.S. No.837 of 2019, one M.M. Augustine, who was arrayed as the 2^nd plaintiff, claimed that he is the validly elected Secretary and the 3^rd plaintiff being the Director. The appellants are questioning the concurrent findings rendered against them and therefore sans a detailed narration of facts. The primary question which this Court is called upon to decide is whether any substantial question of law arises for consideration in the present appeals, warranting admission of the appeals.

2. O.S. No.915 of 2018 was necessitated, according to the appellants, because the 1^st defendant in the said suit, who was the Principal of the Teachers Training Institute, had misappropriated the funds of the society and hostel fee of the students and allegedly withdrawn an amount of Rs.12,66,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakh Sixty Six Thousand only) and later resigned from the post of Principal. A meeting was held on 30.11.2014 to elect new office bearers of the society, and out of the twenty (20) members, sixteen (16) members attended the same and the 2nd plaintiff was elected as the President and the 3^rd plaintiff was elected as the Secretary. Consequently, in the election held on 29.11.2015, the 2^nd defendant was elected as the President and the 3^rd defendant as the Secretary. The 1^st defendant ceased to be even an ordinary member and also the Secretary of the society with effect from 30.11.2014, due to non-remittance of the subscription fee since 2014. Though the 1^st defendant filed O.S. No.35 of 2015 before the Principal Munsiff Court with a prayer of injunction, that application was dismissed, and later, a CMA was filed. By virtue of an order in W.P.C. No.10832 of 2018 filed by the 1^st defendant, he managed to file a list of office bearers before the Registrar of Societies, and since this Court found that the dispute could be resolved only through a properly constituted civil suit, and that the said direction is being challenged in appeal, the suit for injunction is preferred. At that point of time, the second suit was lodged by the plaintiffs therein, contending that they are the legally elected office bearers of the society. Both suits were tried jointly, and after scanning through the voluminous documents, the trial court concluded that the plaintiffs in O.S. No.837 of 2019 are the legally elected office bearers of the society and accordingly dismissed O.S. No.915 of 2018 and decreed O.S. No.837 of 2019. Aggrieved, two appeals, A.S. Nos.26 and 27 of 2023, were preferred before the Sub Court, Nedumangad and both the appeals were dismissed subsequently by a common jud