JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the fair order and decreetal order dated 01.06.2023 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2023 in O.S.No. 133 of 2023 on the file of the First Additional District Court (PCR), Tiruchirappalli.

2. The brief facts of the case:

The first respondent Tamil Evangelical Lutheran Church is a protestant denomination, which was established in the year 1919. The first respondent Church consists of Pastorates. Each Pastorate is administered by a pastorate committee elected by eligible voting members of the congregation for a triennium. The congregation of the pastorate elect its committee members, members to represent the pastorate in the District Council and also members of the Synod Continuation Committee. The Synod Continuation Committee elects Church Council, the highest administrative body of the first respondent th Church. The petitioner is a voting member of the 5 respondent TELC Christ Church, Coimbatore. The petitioner served the first respondent Church in various posts from the year 1979 to 2022. Since the Bishop of first respondent Church retired on 14.02.2021 and the tenure of second th respondent Church Council ended on 10.09.2022, the 8 respondent was appointed as administrator of TELC to conduct election of Bishop as well as Church Council by the Division Bench of Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in its order dated 08.08.2022 passed in Contempt th Application(MD)Nos.3 to 10 of 2022. The 8 respondent took over the th administration of first respondent Church. The 9 respondent was th appointed as Secretary-cum-Election Officer and the 10 respondent was st appointed as Finance-cum-Property Officer of the 1 respondent Church th th by the 8 respondent. While being the facts, the 10 respondent th submitted a report to the 8 respondent on 27.09.2022 in respect of the th allegations against the petitioner and one Nelson. The 8 respondent asked the petitioner to explain the allegations leveled against the petitioner. The petitioner appeared before him on 01.10.2022 and orally th th explained. The 9 respondent was also present along with 10 respondent. The petitioner did not submit any written submission. Based th th on report of the 9 respondent dated 20.10.2022, the 8 respondent vide his proceedings dated 25.10.2022 debarred the petitioner under Rule 182(A) of the first respondent Church Rules. The reports of the respondents 8 to 10 are leveling allegations of misappropriation of TELC funds against the petitioner and also caused huge monetary loss to TELC under 9 heads. The petitioner submitted request letter dated 27.11.2022 th to the 8 respondent to remove the debar order. There was no reply, but th the 9 respondent sent reply letter dated 07.12.2022 informing the petitioner that he was not eligible for the church privileges. The th statement of 9 respondent amounts to Ex.Communication of the petitioner from the first respondent Church and he has no authority and power to pass such an extreme order. Hence, the petitioner filed the main suit in O.S.No.133 of 2023 before the Trial Court seeking declaratory reliefs and also filed petition I.A.No.2 of 2023 in O.S.No.133 of 2022 for an ad-interim injunction restraining the respondents from implementing th the order of the 8 respondent dated 25.10.2022. That petition was stoutly resisted by the respondents by filing detailed counter. After hearing both, the Trial Court has dismissed the petition in I.A.No.2 of 2023 in O.S.No.133 of 2023. Aggrieved by the order of the Trial Court, the appellant/plaintiff moved this Court by way of this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

4. The learned counsel petitioner has put forth his argument at length about the first respondent Church and its Governance and Doctrine. He also argued at length about the Cathalic Pope and 4 kinds of Pastorates. He submits that TELC is one of Lutheran Church, having headquarters at Trichy