LAWS(KER)-1979-3-11

JOSEPH Vs. GEORGE

Decided On March 01, 1979
JOSEPH Appellant
V/S
GEORGE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE matter was taken up in appeal before the court of the Appellate Authority (Land Reforms), Ernakulam in L. R. A. S. 108 of 1975. Two contentions were raised before the Appellate Authority by the revision petitioners. One of these contentions was that on re-conversion to Hinduism, the re-convert does not get into any particular community unless the particular community accepts him as belonging to that particular community. According to the revision petitioners, there was no pleading, much less proof, that the respondents and their father have been recognised by the Cheramar Community as belonging to this community. THE other contention was that even after the purported re-conversion to Hinduism the respondents and their father have been continuously behaving as belonging to the Christian Community. This contention was sought to be supported by several documents. However the Appellate authority rejected this contention and consequently the appeal preferred by the revision petitioners. THErefore they have come to this court with the civil revision petition.

(2.) THE first contention that has been raised is that there was no valid proof of the alleged reconversion of the respondents to hinduism. Secondly it is urged that the courts below should have held that even assuming that there was re-conversion of the respondents and their father to hinduism, it meant, without more, only that they had become Hindus and not that they belonged to any particular community amongst Hindus. It is the petitioners case that the respondents and their father in spite of their alleged reconversion to Hinduism had been continuously behaving as belonging to the christian Community. THE Appellate Authority erred in thinking that there was no acceptable evidence to connect Exts. P1 and P2 documents concerned with the respondents.

(3.) THE question whether when a person converts from hinduism to Christianity he ceased to be a member of his caste, had come up for consideration in many cases. This matter also has been dealt with by the supreme Court in some cases. In Ganpat v. Returning Officer AIR. 1975 SC. 420 it was said: 'for a person who has grown up in Indian society, it is very difficult to get out of the coils of the caste system' and, therefore, even conversion to another religion like Christianity, has in some cases no impact on the membership of the caste and the other members continue to regard the convert as still being a member of the caste. It is interesting to note that the Supreme Court pointed out in Ganpat's case that 'to this day one sees matrimonial advertisements which want a Vellala Christian bride or Nadar christian bride' which shows that Vellala and Nadar castes comprise both Hindus and Christians. In Chatturbhuj Vithaldas Jasani v. Moreshwar Parashram AIR 1954 sc. 236 Justice Bose speaking on behalf of the Court in that case said that when a question arises whether conversion operates as a break away from the caste 'what we have to determine are the social and political consequences of such conversion and that must be decided in a common sense practical way rather than on theoretical and theocratic grounds. THE learned judge further said: 'looked at from the secular point of view there are three factors which have to be considered: (1) the reactions of the old body, (2) the intentions of the individual himself and (3) the rules of the new order. If the old order is tolerant of he new faith and sees no reason to out caste or ex-communicate the convert and the individual himself desires and intends to retain his old social political ties, the conversion is only nominal for all practical purposes and when we have to consider the legal and political rights of the old body, the views of the new faith hardly matter. ' We find a slight different note being struck in S. Rajagopal v. C. M. Armugam AIR. 1969 SC. 101. THEre it was said that when a person embraces Christianity he should be deemed to have lost his membership in the case. THE Christian religion does not recognise any caste classifications. All Christians are treated as equals and there is no distinction between one christian and another of the type that is recognised between members of different castes belonging to Hindu religion. In fact, the Supreme Court pointed out, caste system prevails only amongst Hindus or possibly in some religions closely allied to the Hindu religion like Sikhism Christianity is prevalent not only in India, but almost all over the world and nowhere does christianity recognise caste division. THE tenets of Christianity militate against persons professing Christian faith being divided or discriminated on the basis of any such classification as the caste system. It must, therefore, be held that when a person gets converted to Christianity he would cease to belong to the caste to which he belonged. THEre they relied on the decision of the Madras High Court in G. Michael v. S. Venkateswaran AIR. 1952 Madras 474 where the court said: 'christianity and Islam are religions prevalent not only in India but also in other countries in the world. We know that in other countries these religions do not recognise a system of caste as an integral part of their creed or tenets. ' THE Madras High Court's attention was drawn to the fact that there were several cases in which a member of one the lower castes, who had been converted to Christianity, had continued not only to consider himself as still being a member of the caste who had not been converted. Dealing with this aspect, the Madras High Court said: 'this is somewhat analogous to cases in which even after conversion certain families and groups continue to be governed by the law by which they were governed before they became converts. But these are all cases of exception and the general rule is conversion operates as an expulsion from the caste; in other words, a convert ceases to have any caste'.