Varghese v. Pathrose
Case brief
What is this about?
This appeal challenging the dismissal of a suit by church parishioners was dismissed. The High Court held that the church is a public trust and the suit, instituted without leave of the court under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, was not maintainable.
What did the court decide?
The appeal was dismissed; parties to bear their respective costs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/15TH PHALGUNA, 1936
RFA.No. 31 of 2004
JUDGMENT DATED 29-11-2003 IN OS 95/1977 OF 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM
APPELLANT(S)/PLAINTIFFS 1 TO 3, 6,9 & 10:
1. VARGHESE, THOPPIL HOUSE, VADAVUKODE, VADAVUKODE, KUNNATHUNADU.
2. SLEEBA, NJARATHANKAL HOUSE, VADAVUKODE, VADAVUKODE, KUNNATHUNADU.
3. MATHEW, MARIPADAVIL, VADAVUKODE, VADAVUKODE, KUNNATHUNADU.
4. PATHROSE, MATTATHIL, VADAVUKODE, KUNNATHUNADU.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a suit by parishioners to restrain alteration of a church's administration without compliance with Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure is maintainable.
Whether constituent churches of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church are public religious and charitable trusts under Section 92 of the Code.
Whether the reliefs claimed in the suit fall within the scope of Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Varghese
- appellant
Sleeba
- appellant
Mathew
- appellant
Pathrose
- appellant
Ev. Fr. O.J. Jacob
- appellant
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court