St. George Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church Kathipparathadom v. Fr. Geevargheese Vallikkattill and Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2020 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1942** **RFA.No.239 OF 2019** **AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN OS 177/2013 DATED 14-03-2019 OF SUB COURT,KATTAPPANA** ## **APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS:** - **1 ST.GEORGE JACOBITE SYRIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH KATHIPPARATHADAM, CHELACHUVADU, IDUKKI REP. BY THE TRUSTEE TOJAN VARGHESE, S/O.LATE VARGHESE, AGED 34, ERACHERIL (H), KANJIKKUZHI KARA AND VILLAGE, IDUKKI DIST.** - **2 FR.GEEVARGHESE, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.VARGHESE, KALARIKUNNEL HOUSE, VICAR, ST.GEORGE JACOBITE SYRIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH, KATHIPPARATHADAM, CHELACHUVADU, IDUKKI.** - **3 SHAJI ELIAS, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.ELIAS, NIRAVATHU HOUSE, CHELACHUVADU.P.O., KANJIKKUZHI VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT.** - **4 SAJI VARGHESE, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.VARGHESE, KANJIRAKKATTU HOUSE, CHELACHUVADU P.O., KANJIKKUZHI VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT.** - **5 ELDHOSE, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.ULAHANNAN, VETTUCHIRAYIL HOUSE, CHELACHUVADU.P.O., CHURULY, KANJIKKUZHI VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT.** **BY ADVS. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. SRI.LIJU. M.P SRI.JOPHY POTHEN KANDANKARY** ## **RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:** - **1 FR.GEEVARGHESE VALLIKKATTIL, AGED ABOUT 36, VALLIKKATTIL HOUSE, KOLENCHERI P.O, VADAVUKODE VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682 611** - **2 VARKEYKUNJU,, S/O.VARKEY, AGED ABOUT 58, KIZHAKKEDATH HOUSE, CHELACHUVADU.P.O., KANJIKKUZHI VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685602 (*DIED ADDITIONAL R9 IMPLEADED)** RFA 239/19 2 - **3 GEORGE KARIMPANAKKAL, S/O.POULOSE, AGED ABOUT 48, KEERITHODE.P.O., KANJIKKUZHI VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 602** - **4 CHARLES JACOB, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.JACOB, PAYYALIL HOUSE, KEERITHODE.P.O., PANNAYAR, KANJIKKUZHI VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 602** - **5 HIS BEATITUDE BASELIOUS THOMAS-1, AGED ABOUT 90, CATHOLICOS, CATHOLICATE ARAMANA, MOUNT SENAI, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 686 691** - **6 DR.THOMAS MAR ATHANASIUS METROPOLITIAN, AGED ABOUT 68, BISHOP'S HOUSE, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 686 661** - **7 H.G.ZACHARIAS MOR PHILOXINOS METROPOLITAN, AGED 65 YEARS, MOR GREGORIAN CENTRE, THOOTTOOTI, THIRUVANCHOOR PO, KOTTAYAM-686019** - **8 FR.KOCHUPURACKAL GEEVARGHESE RAMBAN, AGED ABOUT 43, VICAR, ST GEORGE ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH, KATHIPPARATHADAM KARA, KANJIKKUZHY VILLAGE, IDUKKI TALUK AND DISTRICT-685602** - **9 ELIAS SKARIA, S/O.LATE SKARIA, CHIRACKACHALIL HOUSE, THALLAKKANAM, KANJIKKUZHY POST, IDUKKI DIST. (IS IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL R9 ALLEGING THAT HE IS THE PRESENT TRUSTEE, ENTITLED TO REPRESENT THE DECEASED R2 IN THE APPEAL, VIDE ORDER DATED 22.06.2020 IN IA 1/2020)** **R1-2, R6, R8 BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.) R1-2, R6, R8 BY ADV. SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE R1-2, R6, R8 BY ADV. SRI.P.PREJITH R1-2, R6, R8 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS P.KURUVILLA R1-2, R6, R8 BY ADV. SHRI.HARIKRISHNAN S. R1-2, R6, R8 BY ADV. SRI.HARI P.NAIR R1-2, R6, R8 BY ADV. SRI.ANTONY BEN JOSE R8 BY ADV. SRI.MANJUNATH MENON R8 BY ADV. SRI.GITHESH P** **THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** RFA 239/19 3 ## **JUDGMENT** The plaintiffs in O.S.No.177 of 2013, on the files of the Sub Court, Kattapana, are the appellants in this appeal. 2. The afore suit was filed by the plaintiffs praying, _inter alia,_ that the first among them, namely, St.George Jacobite Syrian Orthodox Church (hereinafter referred to as the 'St.George Church'), is an 'independent Parish Church, owing allegiance to the Patriarch of Antioch; and all the Est and His Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, in which the Orthodox faction, defendants 1 to 4 and 6 and their men, including their successors, have got no manner of right, title or interest whatsoever'. Certain corollary declarations were also sought, including that St.George Church can be governed only under the '2002 Constitution of the Jacobite Syrian Christian Church'; and for an injunction restraining the RFA 239/19 4 6[th] defendant and his successors in office from exercising any authority as a Metropolitan in respect of the said Church. 3. Compendiously, the thrust of the assertions of the appellants/plaintiffs, as can be forgathered from their pleadings and evidence on record, is that the St.George Church is a constituent of the 'Jacobite Syrian Christian Church' and therefore, that it is liable to be governed by its own constitution and not in any other manner. In effect, the appellants/plaintiffs assert that the Church has got nothing to do with the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church (hereinafter referred to as 'the Malankara Church' for short) and therefore, that its 1934 Constitution has no place in the administration of the St.George Church. Throughout their pleadings, they thus tried to project St.George Church as being one which RFA 239/19 5 was consecrated by the 'Jacobite faction', thus contending that 1934 Constitution of the Malankara Church cannot be applied to its governance and control. 4. The respondents/defendants, on the other hand, filed their written statement contending vehemently that St.George Church is a constituent of the Malankara Church and therefore, that going by the affirmative declarations of the Honourable Supreme Court in **Moron Mar Baselios Catholics v. Thukalan Paulo Avira and Others [AIR 1959 SC 31]** and **P.M.A. Metropolitan v. Moran Mar Marthoma [AIR** **1995 SC 2001],** it can only be governed by the 1934 Constitution and in no other manner. This contention of the respondents/defendants found favour of the Trial Court and consequently, the suit has been dismissed, through the impugned judgment and decree. 5. I have heard Sri.Sajan Varghese, RFA 239/19 6 learned counsel for the appellants/plaintiffs and Sri.S.Sreekumar, learned Senior Counsel, instructed by Sri.Martin Jose, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents/ defendants. 6. As I have already indicated above, the sole question in this appeal is whether St.George Church is a constituent of the Malankara Church; or whether it has to be construed as an independent Church coming within the fold of what the appellants call the 'Jacobite Syrian Christian Church'. The answer to this issue is not very hard to find because it is, in fact, hidden within the pleadings of the appellants itself. 7. In the plaint, the appellants start by saying that the property, on which St.George Church is situated, was obtained in the name of the then 'Metropolitan of the Kandanad Diocese of Jacobite Church under the spiritual RFA 239/19 7 headship of the Patriarch of Antioch and All the East seated on the Apostolic Throne of St.Peter at Antioch in Syria. 8. After saying so, the appellants further averred that the 2[nd] plaintiff is a Vicar of the 1[st] plaintiff Church appointed by the Metropolitan of Idukki Diocese of the Jacobite Syrican Christian Church. However, moving forward, they virtually concede that _'as such the property was got assigned in the name of His Beatitude Baselios Paulose II, the_ _then Catholics of the Patriarch Section in the_ _Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church (Malankara_ _Church)’_ ( _sic_ ). Pertinently, in paragraph 9 of the plaint, they allege that the 6[th] defendant, who is the 6[th] respondent herein, had been initially appointed as a Metropolitan of the Kandanad Diocese of the Malankara Church by the Patriarch of Antioch, but that when he switched loyalty to the 'Orthodox faction' of RFA 239/19 8 the said Church, a 'Kalpana' (decree), dated 12.04.1999, had been issued by His Holiness the Patriarch of Antioch, to the effect that he shall not exercise the power of the Metropolitan of the Kandanad Diocese of the 'Patriarch faction' and that the said post shall be officiated by Mor Dionosius Thomas Metropolitan. 9. Moving forward, the further plaint averments are to the effect that _'in the meanwhile, the General body of the 1[st] plaintiff Church got convened and decided the 1[st] plaintiff to be a member of the Jacobite Syrian Christian Association and at present the 1[st] plaintiff is being administered in terms of 2002 Constitution of the Jacobite Syrian Christian Church'_ (sic). After saying as afore, the plaint then clearly shows that the plaintiffs refer themselves as the 'Patriarch faction’ and the respondents/ RFA 239/19 9 defendants as the ‘Orthodox faction’ but still assert that they are an independent group having allegiance only to the Jacobite Syrian Christian Association and consequently, that St.George Church can be administered only as per the 2002 Constitution of the said Association. 10. I have narrated the averments in the plaint as afore only because, as is now too well-known to be reinstated that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in **PMA Metropolitan** (supra) and subsequently, **in K.S.Varghese and Others v.** **St.Peter's and St.Paul's Syrian Orthodox and** **Others [2017 (3) KLT 261 SC]** have declared unambiguously and affirmatively that any Church, which is the constituent of the Malankara Church, can be governed and controlled only by its 1934 Constitution. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in **K.S.Varghese** (supra), in fact, reaffirmed these RFA 239/19 10 declarations in paragraphs 228.1, 228.2, 228.4, 228.6 and 228.24 of the said judgment. 11. Thereafter, in **Fr.Issac Mattammel Cor-** **Episcopa v. St.Mary's Orthodox Syrian Church** **[2019(4)KLT1]** the Hon'ble Supreme Court ingeminatingly made it absolutely clear, under Article 141 of the Constitution of India, as under: _6. It is made clear to all concerned more so, to the Courts that in future the violation of judgment and order to be viewed seriously. Let similar matters which are pending to be decided following aforesaid judgment and order. There can be no further litigation as the decision in representative suit is binding._ **==> picture [358 x 12] intentionally omitted <==** merits of this appeal strictly keeping in mind the afore declarations and directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. **==> picture [358 x 12] intentionally omitted <==** any case only if they are able to establish RFA 239/19 11 that St.George Church was not consecrated as being a constituent of the Malankara Church. The moment they concede to the same, their allegations in the plaint become incapable of my consideration on account of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **K.S.Varghese** (supra); and hence the legal aspects in this case hinge on this sole issue and nothing else. 13. Sri.Sajan Varghese, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, began his submissions by saying that there is no evidence on record to show that the St.George Church was, at any time, part of the Malankara Church. He says that, as has been averred in the plaint, the Church was consecrated in the year 1977 by a group of people, who owed their allegiance to the Patriarch of Antioch, without any intention of being part of the Malankara Church; and consequently that they RFA 239/19 12 are entitled and justified in seeking declaration that it is an independent one. 14. In refutation of the afore, Sri.S.Sreekumar, learned Senior Counsel, submitted that the very plaint averments, as have been extracted above, would belie the afore contentions of the appellants, since it is unequivocally admitted therein that St.George Church is a part of the Malankara Church. He says that this is unmistakable from the specific asseverations in the plaint, wherein the appellants describe themselves as the ‘Patriarch faction’ and identify the defendants as the ‘Orthodox faction’; which can only mean that they are referring to the Malankara Church. He thus prays that this appeal be dismissed. 15. When I consider the afore submissions and go through the materials on record, it becomes expressly perspicuous that the RFA 239/19 13 appellants/plaintiffs are now straining themselves to somehow maintain that St.George Church was never part of the Malankara Church. However, as rightly pointed out by Sri.S.Sreekumar, the plaint averments and evidence on record would clearly demonstrate to the contrary. This is because, the statement in the plaint, as extracted above, make unequivocal admissions to the fact that the Church was consecrated as part of and within the fold of the Malankara Church, which becomes indisputable by their own admissions that the property was assigned in the name of _‘His Beatitude Baselios Paulose II, the then Catholics of the Patriarch faction in the_ _Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church (Malankara Church)’_ . The appellants, therefore, indubitably acknowledge that His Beatitude Baselios Paulose II was the Catholics of the ‘Patriarch section’ of the Malankara Church RFA 239/19 14 and therefore, it would be impossible on their part to now turn around and assert that St.George Church was consecrated as an independent one, beyond the fold of the Malankara Church. 16. The afore admission by the appellants is not a singular event in the plaint and as has been noticed above in the extracted portions thereof, their consistent scheme of narration is to the effect that they belong to the ‘Patriarch faction’, while the defendants belong to the ‘Orthodox faction’, which could only mean that the factions within the Malankara Church existed prior to the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 17. That said, once **P.M.A.Metropolitan** (supra) and **K.S.Varghese** (supra) had been delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it becomes impossible for any person to claim that factionalism in the Malankara Church RFA 239/19 15 continues or that they should be treated as the ‘Patriarch faction’ or ‘Orthodox faction’ respectively. This is more so because the appellants concede that a decision was taken to bring St.George Church as a member of the ‘Jacobite Syrian Christian Association’ much later in the year 2014 or so; and that the Church, thereafter, was administered by the '2002 Constitution of the Jacobite Syrian Christian Church'. 18. In this context, the conclusive declarations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in paragraph 228.24 of **K.S.Varghese** (supra) is to the effect that the 2002 Constitution is the result of illegal and void exercise and consequently, that a parallel system created for the administration of the Parish Churches of the Malankara Church cannot be recognised or allowed to hold the field. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, thereafter, declared without RFA 239/19 16 cause for any further dispute that all such Churches shall be administered only under the 1934 Constitution of the Malankara Church. 19. In the case at hand, there are absolutely no averments or evidence on record from the side of the appellants that they have broken away from the Malankara Church at any point of time prior to 2014, when the decision to administer the Church under the '2002 Constitution of the Jacobite Syrian Christian Church’ had been taken; and resultantly, they cannot impel a claim that the Church had always been an independent one, beyond the control of the Malankara Church. I am afraid that these contentions have no legs to stand on after **P.M.A.Metropolitan** (supra) and **K.S.Varghese** (supra) and obviously, therefore, the Trial Court was completely justified in having dismissed the suit since, as is evidenced from the prayers afore extracted, RFA 239/19 17 what the appellants are seeking to obtain is a declaration contrary to the law settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In the afore circumstances, I find no merit in any of the contentions in this appeal and consequently, dismiss the same; however, taking note of the singular circumstance presented, I deem it appropriate not to make any order as to costs and to direct the parties to suffer their respective costs. **Sd/-** ## **DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** RR **JUDGE**