SELINE FERNANDEZ Vs. BERNARD FRANCIS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The words "bound" and "loosed" are expressions borrowed from the Jews, which means respectively "prohibited" and "permitted". Thus St. Peter was entrusted with the key to establish the Catholic Church on Earth. The keys are seen as the symbol of papal authority. The Kingdom of heaven, here, means the Church on Earth. St. Peter was entrusted the key to open the doors of faith to the world. It is believed that St. Peter is the "Rock", on which the Church has been built on this Earth. St. Peter is considered to be the head of the Apostolic College and to this day, the supreme legislator of the Catholics, is the Roman Pontiff. The Apostles were empowered with the power to bind and loose (prohibit and permit); in the affairs of the Church, to set Church policy and teachings. Interesting question as to whether a Christian, more specifically, the Administrators elected by a Parish needs the sanction of its "ordinary" to initiate civil litigation to protect the property of the Church is one of the questions raised here. The unsuccessful defendants 1 and 2 before the trial Court, who are also the appellants in the first appellate Court, are the appellants in the above Second Appeal. The defendants 1 and 2 are the same persons; defendant No. 2 is impleaded in her capacity of Managing Partner of a firm as defendant No. 1.

(2.) The respondents/plaintiffs are the parishioners/Roman Catholics residing in the Edavaka of Mukkad Thirukudumba Church of Meenathucherry, Sakthikulangara Village, hereinafter referred to as "the Church". The plaintiffs 1 and 2 claimed to be the trustees and the 3rd plaintiff the Convener of the elected representatives of the parish constituting a Committee, in which plaintiffs 3 to 12 are members. The 3rd defendant is the Bishop of the Quilon Catholic Diocese, under which the Church comes, and the 4th defendant is the Vicar, appointed by the said Bishop. The suit was one filed for declaration of title and possession of plaint schedule properties, more fully described in plaint 'A', 'B' and 'C' schedules comprised in Survey No. 2/63; totalling 2 acres and 15.5 cents. According to the revenue records, Survey No. 2/63 comprised a total of 3.51 acres. In addition to the declaration that the said property belonged to the Church Trust, fixation of boundaries as also injunction against obstruction of enjoyment of the property by the plaintiffs, the trust and the parishioners; as against defendants 1 and 2 was also sought An ancillary relief in the nature of recovery and mesne profits in the event of any encroachment during the pendency of the suit was also prayed.

(3.) The defendants filed written statement claiming title over plaint 'A' schedule property and raised a counter claim, in the nature of injunction from trespass, and destruction of boundaries and improvements. Though in the written statement the title of the Church over plaint 'B' and 'C' schedules were also disputed, it was given up in the course of the proceedings as is evident from the deposition of D.W.1. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants also does not urge it before this Court. Essentially the dispute is with respect to plaint 'A' schedule property. The appellants/defendants 1 and 2 claim title over the very same property and resists the suit on the basis of derivation of independent title by virtue of Exhibits B7 and B8; respectively of 51.5 cents and 50 cents, lying north-south.