NALANGORA INASU PYLETH Vs. S T VAREE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is against an order appointing receiver in the following circumstances. A suit had been filed by the respondents as members of the Church of the East in India in their representative capacity for an injunction that the election which was to have been held on 9/12/1962 should not be held. An application for interim injunction however, was rejected and the election was held on 9/12/1962. In or about 1963 the respondents amended the plaint with an additional prayer for a declaration that the elections held on 9/12/1962 were invalid. They also impleaded defendants Nos. 15 to 89 including the central Trustees who were defendants Nos. 15,16 and 19. It may be mentioned here that according to the constitution of the Church four central Trustees are elected and of the four one had died before he took charge and that is why only three persons namely defendants Nos. 15, 16 and 19, who were the central Trustees were made parties. On 12/02/1964 the appellant made an application for appointment of a receiver and for directions to the receiver to take charge of the properties of the Church. This application was granted on 19/02/1965 and the court appointed two advocates as receivers. Against appointment of the receiver the appellant filed an appeal to the Subordinate Judge of Trichur. The Subordinate Judge vacated the, order appointing the receiver. The respondent went in revision to the High court. The High court reversed the order of the appellate court and confirmed that of the trial court with the result that the direction to appoint the two receivers and to take charge of the properties was restored. As against that order this appeal has been filed.

(2.) It is alleged that according to the constitution of the Churchelections of the trustees have to be held every three years and accordingly new trustees were elected in 1966. The validity of this election, however, is not admitted by the respondents. Be that as it may, a petition was filed by the appellants in the trial court that since nothing has been alleged against the new trustees the order appointing the receivers should be set aside and the properties of the Church handed over to the new trustees. The trial court dismissed that petition, as against which a revision petition was filed in the High court. In that revision petition the High court was of the view that there was no error of jurisdiction. Accordingly while dismissing it, it further directed that:

(3.) The reference to the directions of the High court referred to in this order is the order made by the trial court in conformity with the order of the High court dated 13/12/1967. Thereafter the respondents filed a second appeal against the dismissal of their suit in the High court which we are informed is pending in that court.