A civil court has jurisdiction over disputes involving unincorporated church bodies when fundamental rights are alleged to be infringed, necessitating a proper hearing on the merits of the case.

JUDGMENT

This Appeal Suit is filed against the judgment and decree, dated 11.03.2024 passed in I.A.No.4 of 2023 in O.S.No.133 of 2023 on the file of the learned First Additional District Judge (PCR), Tiruchirappalli.

2. The appellant is the plaintiff in O.S.No.133 of 2023 on the file of the learned First Additional District Court (PCR), Tiruchirappalli. The respondents are the defendants 1 to 10 in that suit.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rank before the trial Court.

4. The brief facts are as below:

(i) The plaintiff has filed the main suit against the 1^st defendant, Tamil Evangelical Lutheran Church (herein after called as TELC), its board members and other defendants for declaration and other reliefs. The TELC is a protestant denomination and it was established in the year 1919. It 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 elects 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 the Church Council, which is the highest administrative body of the 1^st respondent Church. The plaintiff is a voting member of the 5^th defendant, TELC Christ Church, Coimbatore. The plaintiff served the 1^st defendant Church in various posts from the year 1979 to 2022. The Bishop of the 1^st defendant retired on 14.02.2021 and the tenure of the 2^nd defendant Church Council ended on 10.09.2022. Hence, the 8th defendant was appointed as administrator of TELC to conduct the election of Bishop as well as Church Council as per order, dated 08.08.2022, passed in Contempt Application(MD)No.3 to 10 of 2022 by the Division Bench of Madurai Bench of Madras High Court. The 8^th defendant took over the administration of the 1^st defendant's Church. The 8^th defendant appointed the 9^th defendant as Secretary-cum-Election Officer and the 10^th defendant as Finance-cum-Property Officer of the 1^st defendant/TELC. When the facts are being so, the 10^th defendant has submitted a report to the 8th defendant on 27.09.2022, leveling allegations against the plaintiff & one Nelson and called for the plaintiff to explain the allegations against the plaintiff. The plaintiff has appeared before him on 01.10.2022 and made an oral explanation. The plaintiff has not submitted any written submission. The 9^th defendant was also present along with the 10^th defendant. Based on the report of the 9^th respondent, dated 20.10.2022, the 8^th respondent, vide his proceedings dated 25.10.2022, debarred the petitioner under Rule 182(A) of the 1^st respondent Church Rules. The reports of the respondents 8 to 10 are leveling allegations of misappropriation of TELC funds and huge monetary loss to TELC against the plaintiff. The plaintiff submitted a request letter, dated 27.11.2022 to the 8^th respondent to remove the debar order. There was no reply, but the 9^th defendant sent a reply letter, dated 07.12.2022, informing the plaintiff that he was not eligible for the Church's privileges. The statement of the 9^th defendant amounts to Ex-Communication of the plaintiff from the 1^st respondent Church and he has no authority and power to pass such an extreme order. Hence, the plaintiff has filed the main suit.

(ii) On receipt of summons, the respondents, who are defendants 1 to 4 have filed a written statement and then they have filed the petition in I.A.No.4 of 2023 in O.S.No.133 of 2023 under Order 7 Rule 11(a) and (d) of CPC., to reject the plaint on the ground that there is no cause of action for the suit and the suit is ba