SATKUNAM AND OTHER VS. AMBIKAIAMMAHA AND OTHERS

SATKUNAM AND OTHER
VS.
AMBIKAIAMMAHA AND OTHERS

COURT OF APPEAL
WIMALACHANDRA, J
CA LA 317/2006 (LG)
DC JAFFNA 166/MISc
AUGUST 16, 2008

Injunction - Charitable Religious Trust - Managed by hereditary trustee -Trust Ordinance section 102 (1), Section 102 (1) (f), section 102 (1) (i) -Section 102 (1) (s) - Is it imperative to comply with section 102 (3) before-filing action?

The Plaintiff instituted action on the basis that, families of the Plaintiff were the worshippers who conduct and perform the annual celebrations of the "Kovil" -and the festival of the Temple, and sought an injunction preventing the Defendants from obstructing the Plaintiffs in holding the festival.

The Court after inquiry granted the injunction as prayed for.

In the Leave to Appeal application filed by the Plaintiff with leave being granted, the Defendant contended that, the Plaintiffs have failed to comply with section 102(1) of the Trust Ordinance and that, (he Plaintiffs are only devotees and they have no connection with the administration of the Temple.

Held:

(1) According to Section 102 (1) before filing an action the Plaintiffs are required to comply with the provisions of the section 102 (3) of the Trust Ordinance.

(2) A certificate under section 102 (3) is preceded by several steps that the law requires - failure to file a certificate from the government agent under section 102 resulted in a patent lack of jurisdiction, which would disentitle the Plantiff to continue with the action.

APPEAL from the order of the District Court of Jaffna, with leave being granted.

Cases referred to:

1. Kanagasabai vs Sivasambu - CA 161/81 C.A.M 6.7.1981
2. Nadaraja Arunasalam and 2 others vs Rasanayagam and another - CA 479/84 (F), DC Jaffna TR/44
3. Sivaguru vs Alagaratnam - 48 NLR 369
4. Sitaravelu vs Ramalingam - 61 C.L.W 31
5. Arumaithura vs Arudeselvaraygam - 65 C.L.W. 11/67 NLR 522
6. Velauthan vs Velauthen - 61 NLR 230
7. Ramesh and another vs Chettiar - 2004 -1 SLR 355

N.R. Sivendran with K.Prabhakaran and C.R, Rashid for the Defendant - Petitioners

A. Muthukrishnan with R. Pathmanathan for the 1st to 3rd Plaintiffs- Respondents

Cur.adv.vult.

August 19, 2008.
L. K. WIMALACHANDRA, J.

This is an application for leave to appeal from the order of the learned District Judge of Jaffna dated 11.07.2006. By that order the learned Judge granted the interim injunction prayed for by the plaintiffs. Being aggrieved by the said order the defendant-petitioners (defendants) filed this leave to appeal application.

The plaintiffs have instituted this action on the basis that the families of the plaintiffs were the worshippers who conduct and perform the annual celebration of the temple called "Kokuvil West Sithy Vinayagar (Aiyanar) Kovil". The 1st, 2nd and 3rd plaintiffs have pleaded that they have the hereditary rights to organize the flag raising festival, chariot festival,

theertham festival and have rights to organize the Maha Uthsava festival of the Temple The plaintiffs prayed for -

(a) a permanent injunction preventing the defendants or their relatives, those who are holding under them, agents, servants from obstructing the plaintiffs in holding the Maha Uthsava festival,

(b) an enjoining order in the first instance and an interim injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, servants and those who are holding under them from obstructing the plaintiffs from holding the Maha Uthsava festival.

An application for enjoining order was supported ex-parte, and the Court granted the enjoining order as prayed for in the plaint, and issued summons on the defendants. On the summons returnable date the defendants entered appearance and filed their objections and affidavits to the plaintiffs' application for an interim injunction. The Court fixed the matter for inquiry When the matter was taken up for inquiry, the Court after hearing the parties granted the afo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document