IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 7TH ASWINA 1931 RP.No. 435 of 2004() IN CRP.NO.3648 of 2002 -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN CRP.2648/2002 Dated 27/02/2004 CMA.947/2002 of I ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------------- 1. ST.MARY'S ORTHODOX CHURCH, ATTIMKUNNU KAKKOOR REP. BY ITS TRUSTEE RENJITH KUMAR. 2. K.S.VARGHESE, S/O.SEEMAN, AGED 56, KUNNUMMEL HOUSE, MANNATHOOR POMPAKKADA, MUVATTUPUZHA. 3. ENJITH KUMAR.T. S/O.ISSAC, AGED 29, THENNITTAMPADY KAKKOOR P.O. KOOTHATTUKULAM. 4. FR.ISSAC MATTAMMEL S/O.MATHAI, AGED 50 ATTIMKUNNU, ST.MARY'S ORTHODOX CHURCH, ATTIMKUNNU, KAKKOOR. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S)/REVISION PETITIONER: ----------------------------------- 1. REV.FR.PHILIP VARGHESE, S/O.VARGHESE, AGED 31, VADAKKEPPARAMBIL HOUSE, KUMARAKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. REV.FR.SLEEBA VATTAVELLIL, S/O.FR.PAULOSE, AGED 36, VATTAVELIL HOUSE, KOLENCHERRY P.O. THANNIKKARA. ADV. SRI.M.CHATHUKUTTY NAMBIAR SRI.C.MURALEEKRISHNAN SRI.K.B.DAYAL SRI.M.C.NAMBIAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- R.P.NO.435 OF 2004 IN C.R.P.NO.2648 OF 2002 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of September, 2009 O R D E R The review petition is filed to modify or review the order passed by this Court in C.R.P.No.2648 of 2002. The above revision was filed by the defendants in O.S.No.19 of 2002 on the file of the Sub Court, Muvattupuzha. Suit was one for perpetual prohibitory injunction and the respondents in the revision were the plaintiffs. Suit arose on the disputes between the two factions of Malankara Church setting forth rival claims over the Church and its properties. Plaintiffs in the suit, alongwith the suit moved an application for interim injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering with the Church and its affairs involved in that case. That application was dismissed by the trial court. In appeal, preferred by the plaintiffs, the order passed by the trial court was reversed, granting an order of interim injunction. Against the judgment R.P.NO.435 OF 2004 IN C.R.P.NO.2648 OF 2002 () 2 of the appellate court, the defendants preferred the above revision before this Court. An order passed by this Court dated 27.2.2004 disclose that the objections raised by the respondents/plaintiffs that in view of the amendment to Section 115 of the CPC under the Amendment Act of 2002 that the revision was not maintainable, was found acceptable with the result, this Court took the view that the matter need not be examined on its merits. However, taking note of the submissions made that vacating the order of interim injunction granted by the appellate court, was likely to create law and problem in view of the hue between the rival factions directing both parties were ordered to maintain statusquo till the disposal of the suit. The respondents/plaintiffs have filed the review petition contending that when the revision itself has been found not maintainable, the interim order of statusquo should not have been ordered, and that order is liable to be reviewed and set aside. R.P.NO.435 OF 2004 IN C.R.P.NO.2648 OF 2002 () 3 2. I heard the learned counsel. In view of the lapse of time after the passing of the order in the revision, and the continuance of such statusquo till date, I find it is not proper and appropriate to modify that order at that stage, whatever be the correctness or legality of that order. It is also brought to my notice that the suit originally instituted and pending on the file of the Sub Court, Muvattupuzha subsequent to orders passed by this Court, has been transferred to the Ist Additional District Court, Ernakulam, a special court constituted for trial of the Church cases, and it has been renumbered as O.S.No.27 of 2009 on the file of that court. It is submitted that in view of the present review petition pending before this Court, the trial of the suit has not proceeded so far. Considering the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, I direct the Ist Additional District Judge, Ernakulam to give top most priority to the trial, and dispose it after giving sufficient opportunity to both sides to lead evidence in respect of their R.P.NO.435 OF 2004 IN C.R.P.NO.2648 OF 2002 () 4 respective case, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. I make it clear that untramelled by observations made in the revision or the judgment and orders giving rise to that revision by the courts concerned, the trial court shall dispose the suit on its merits. The review petition is closed with the above direction. Send a copy of the order to the Ist Additional District Court, Ernakulam, forthwith. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- R.P.NO.435 OF 2004 IN C.R.P.NO.2648 OF 2002 () ----------------------------------- O R D E R 29th day of September, 2009