THOOTHUKUDI NAZARETH Vs. CHURCH OF SOUTH INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE applications are filed seeking ad interim injunction restraining the respondents from in any manner interfering with the internal administration and management of the affairs of the first applicant Diocese and also from in any way preventing the applicants from exercising their right to take disciplinary action as contemplated under the Constitution of the Thoothukudi Nazareth Diocese pending disposal of the suit.

(2.) THE first applicant is the Thoothukudi Nazareth Diocese represented by its Treasurer and the second applicant is the Bishop of Thoothukudi Nazareth Diocese. They have contended in their applications that during the course of their business and regular transaction, it came to light that some of the office bearers of the first applicant Diocese misappropriated, embezzled and mishandled the funds of the first applicant Diocese. Criminal Complaints were filed by some of the office bearers and the same are pending investigation on the file of the District Crime Branch, Thoothukudi. The High Power Commission consisting of ten member of the Diocese unanimously found in its report dated 13. 10. 2007 that some members have embezzled the funds of the first applicant causing monetary loss to it. Directing the erring members to make good the loss and deficiency made by them to the first applicant Diocese, appropriate proceedings also have been initiated against them in accordance with law. While being so, the respondents, in order to aid those erring members, called upon the applicants to submit all those accounts to them for their scrutiny and threatened them not to take any action as against the erring members. Therefore, the applicants have sought for the interim relief as stated supra.

(3.) THE respondents have filed common counter contending that the suit filed by the unregistered body without obtaining leave under Order 1 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure as against the defendant, another unregistered body is not maintainable. Therefore, no interim order can be passed in a suit which is not instituted properly before this court. The Bishop of the Diocese shall have a general oversight of the financial administration of the Diocese, but, shall not exercise any direct control over the finances. The respondents have received so many complaints with regard to the administration of the Thoothukudi Nazareth Diocese. The respondents have nothing to do with the pending case under investigation before the police authorities. But, the fact that so many criminal complaints are pending before various authorities will go to show that there is no peace in the Thoothukudi Nazareth Diocese under the shepherd of Bishop. Therefore, the respondents have no other option except to ask the Bishop according to the constitution of Church of South India to produce the records. It is the duty of the Bishop to follow the spirit of the constitution. The Bishop and the Treasurer of the first applicant have acted as Chairman and Member of the High Power Commission constituted by him. The applicants have approached the court with uncleaned hands casting aspersion on the second respondent who is the Moderator of the Church of South India. The accounts pertaining to the period 2006-2007 were not approved by the Diocese even though it was audited by a Chartered Accountant. But without approving the accounts, the applicants have submitted the accounts of the first respondent with an ulterior motive, knowing full well that the audited statements of accounts from all the Dioceses coming under the Church of South India will have to be consolidated and submitted to the Finance Department of the Government. The letter emanated from the respondents simply directs the first applicant to submit the accounts and not to take hasty steps till such time the respondents, being the officers of the Synod unravelled the truth in the disputes between the members to do justice to them. The letter emanated from the respondents was misinterpreted to suit the convenience of the applicants. When the letter is not aimed at any individual, the applicants allege that the respondents had written to them advising not to take any legal action against those individuals who were accused of misappropriation. Therefore, for all these reasons, the respondents would submit that the applications deserve dismissal.