M.I. KESARI Vs. P. PONMANUVEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second appeal comes under the caption -for dismissal - today. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant is present and after getting the permission of this Court, the learned counsel argued his case for the appellant.

(2.) THIS second appeal has been directed against the decree and judgment in A.S.No.6 of 1996, on the file of the Court of Additional Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil (disposed of by the incharge Principal Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil). The first defendant, who has lost his case before the Courts below, is the appellant herein.

(3.) THE short facts of the plaint sans irrelevant particulars relevant for deciding this second appeal are as follows: The plaintiff is the Deacon and Accountant of the C.S.I. Church, Retnapuram, Kanyakumari District. He was elected as Deacon and Accountant by the members of the C.S.I. Church, Retnapuram. The C.S.I. Church at Retnapuram is one of the Churches under Kanyakumari Diocese. The second defendant is a Church worker there. The Kanyakumari Diocese is governed by its own Constitution. On 18.5.1964, the plaintiff married one -Arulammal Perinba Elsy Rani -. The marriage with whom was registered in Kottaram Sub -Registrar Office as document No.12 of 1964 and lived as husband and wife for a period of 9 years. While so, they could not live together as husband and wife due to certain circumstances. Hence, the plaintiff and his wife decided to dissolve their marriage themselves and on 5.4.1973, registered a divorce deed in the Sub -Registrar Office, Kottaram as document No.17 of 1973. As the first marriage of the plaintiff was dissolved, then the plaintiff married Y.Indrani on 12.11.1990. The marriage was solemnised in Nagercoil C.S.I. Home Church by Rev. Y. Robinson. Following this marriage, the plaintiff -s wife gave birth to two children. Both the children were baptised by the first defendant himself, Rt. Rev. G. Christdhas M.A.B.D., the Bishop of Kanyakumari Diocese. From the date of marriage till now the plaintiff and his wife are living happily together and leading a Christian life. They continue to be members of the Retnapuram Church. That being so, to the surprise of the plaintiff, on 21.11.1990, the plaintiff received a letter dated 15.11.1990 from the defendant Rt. Rev. G. Christdhas, the Bishop, stating that the plaintiff has lost his membership of C.S.I. Church with immediate effect, since the plaintiff had married against the Constitution. The action taken by the defendant cancelling his membership from Retnapuram C.S.I. Church is ultra vires of the Diocesan Constitution and against the Principles of natural justice. This is done only with the wrongful intention of preventing the plaintiff from taking part in the Church committee election, which is to be conducted in January 1991. Before taking action, the plaintiff was not given any opportunity to explain his case. The order issued by the defendant is void ab intio and will not bind the plaintiff. The plaintiff is entitled to continue to be the member of that Church. The allegation in the letter that the plaintiff -s marriage is against the Constitution is not correct. After dissolution of the first marriage, the marriage of the plaintiff was solemnized in the C.S.I. Home Church at Nagercoil. The children born to them also have been baptised by the first defendant himself. As such, the proceedings of the first defendant is null and void. So, the plaintiff is entitled to get a decree setting aside the proceeding of the first defendant, dated 15.11.1990. The plaintiff is also entitled to take part in the Church committee election. Otherwise, the plaintiff will be put to irreparable loss and injury. Hence, the suit.