The Synod's supreme governing and legislative powers under the Constitution of Church of South India justified the direction to submit accounts and the intervention in diocesan affairs.

M. Chockalingam, J.

This judgment shall govern these three appeals in OSA Nos.357, 358 and 375 of 2008.

2. These appeals have arisen from a common order of the learned Single Judge of this Court made in O.A.Nos.530 and 531 of 2008 in C.S.No.475/2008. OSA 375/2008 is brought forth by the defendants, while OSA Nos.357 and 358/2008 are by the plaintiffs in the suit.

3. The plaintiffs filed the said two Original Applications for ad interim injunctions one restraining the defendants from in any manner interfering with the internal administration and management of the affairs of the first plaintiff Diocese and the other restraining them from in any way preventing the plaintiffs from exercising their right to take disciplinary action in any form, as contemplated under the Constitution of the Thoothukudi Nazareth Diocese with the following averments:

The plaintiffs came to know that some of the Office Bearers of the first plaintiff Diocese misappropriated and mishandled the funds of the first plaintiff diocese, and criminal complaints were filed by some of the office bearers, which are pending investigation. As per the report dated 110. 2007, the High Power Commission consisting of ten members of the Diocese, unanimously found that some of the members have embezzled the funds of the first plaintiff causing monetary loss to it. Hence, necessary proceedings were initiated against them in accordance with law. While the matter stood thus, the defendants in order to help those erring members, called upon the plaintiffs to submit accounts to them for scrutiny and also threatened them not to take any action as against the erring members.

4. The defendants contested the applications by filing a common counter stating that the suit filed under Order 1 Rule 8 of C.P.C., itself is not at all maintainable; that both the first plaintiff and the first defendant are unregistered bodies; that under the circumstances, no interim order could be made; that the Bishop of the Diocese shall have a general oversight of the financial administration of the Diocese, but shall not exercise control over the finance; that the defendants received so many complaints as regards the administration of the first plaintiff Diocese; that the fact that so many criminal complaints are pending would itself go to show that there is no peace in the first plaintiff Diocese; that in such circumstances, the defendants have no other option than to require the Bishop, according to the Constitution of Church of South India, to produce the records; that the Bishop and the Treasurer of the first plaintiff have acted as Chairman and Member of the High Power Commission respectively; that the accounts for the period 2006-2007 were not approved by the Diocese even though it was audited; that without approval, the plaintiffs have submitted accounts to the first defendant with an ulterior motive knowing the fact that the audited statements of accounts relating to all the Dioceses coming under the Church of South India will have to be consolidated and submitted to the Finance Department; that the letter from the defendants would simply require the plaintiffs to submit accounts and not to take hasty steps, and hence the applications were to be dismissed.

5. The learned Single Judge on enquiry, allowed both the applications apart from observing that the second defendant was empowered to direct the first plaintiff to submit books of accounts for the financial years 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 for scrutiny. Hence these appeals by the respective parties.

6. Advancing arguments on behalf of the appellants in OSA 375/2008, the learned Senior Counsel Mr.V.Prakash would submit that the first plaintiff institution and the first defendant institution were unregistered bodies, and hence leave should have been obtained to sue or to be sued in representative capacity; that the suit itself was not at all maintainable since no leave was obtained; that under the circumstances, no interim order could