K P PETER Vs. CHERIAN VARGHESE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE revision petitions are directed against the order dated 21.2.2014 passed by the 1st Additional District Court, Ernakulam in O.S.6 of 2012 holding that the suit is maintainable.

(2.) SHORN off unnecessary details, the claim of the plaintiffs is that the first defendant Church is a constituent parish church of Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church. The Malankara Syrian Christian Association which was constituted in 1876 convened a meeting on 26.12.1934 and a Constitution was passed for the administration of Malankara Church and constituent parish churches. There were conflicts between the two factions of the Church which ultimately resulted in two decisions of the Apex Court, namely, Moran Mar Baselious Cathelicos Case,1958 KerLT 721and in MOST REV P M A METROPOLITAN V/S MORAN MAR MARTHOMA, 1995 AIR(SC) 2001which to a considerable extent gave a quietus to the issue. After the decision reported in Moran Mar Baselious Cathelicos Case, for a brief period there was peace among the factions. Again the trouble erupted and that resulted in the decision in PMA Metropolitan case. By the said decision, it was held that all the Parish Churches to Malankara Association are governed by the 1934 Constitution. Subsequently amendment was brought about by the Apex Court to the said Constitution with the intention of following democracy in its administration. According to the plaintiffs, the second defendant is a duly appointed Vicar of the Church by the Diocesan Metropolitan by his order dated 26.7.2010. It is alleged that defendants 3 to 5 who claimed to be in management of the first defendant Church have been collecting money and misappropriating the same. It is also alleged that they are acting against the interests of the Church and are defying the authorities under the 1934 Constitution. According to the plaintiffs, as they are not willing to accept 1934 Constitution, they are not competent to continue as office bearers of the Church. They also do not have any right to deal with the assets of the Church.

(3.) ON the basis of the above allegations, the suit was laid under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure.