MOST REV. P.M.A. METROPOLITAN AND ORS. ETC.versusMORAN MAR MARTHOMA MATHEWS AND ANR. ETC.

A          MOST REV. P.M.A. METROPOLITAN AND ORS. ETC.
                                         v.
         MORAN MAR MARTHOMA MATHEWS AND ANR. ETC.

                               FEBRUARY 5, 1997

B               (B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, SUHAS C. SEN, AND
                           S.B. MAJMUDAR, JJ.)

                                                                                   ,,,J.. __
           Decree-Drawn on the Judgmelll of Supreme Court-Objected to by
    pai1ies remitted back to Registrar-Decree raised-Again objected by the
C   parties-Directions issued for preparation of decree afresh-Time for conduct-
    ing elections to the Association and Diocesan Assemblie:i extended.

          CIVIL AP PELLATE JURISDICTION : Interlocutory Application
    Nos. 1- 9.

D                                        In

          Civil Appeal Nos. 4958-60 of 1990 Etc.

          From the Judgment and Order dated 1.6.90 of the Kerala High Court
    in A.S. Nos. 331/80, 362/90 and 358 of 1980.
E
          C.S. Vaidyanathan, Barish N. Salve, F.S. Nariman, Raju
    Ramachandran and T.L.V. Iyer, P.K. Manohar, Roy Abraham, Ms. Baby
                                                                                               -
    Krishnan, E.M.S. Anam, Ms. Lily Thomas, Ms. K. V. Vijayakumar, P. J.
    Philips, K. V. Mohan, T.G.N. Nair, Ranjit Thomas, Sudarsh Menon and S.
    Balakrishnan for the appearing parties.
F
          The following Order of the Court was delivered :

         These matters are posted before us for orders with respect to the
  drafting of the decree pursuant to this Court's judgment delivered on
  January 20, 1995. By order dated March 25, 1996, we had requested M5.
G Manju Goel, Registrar (Judicial - II) to prepare the decree in the light of
  the judgment aforesaid, after notice to both the parties. The learned
  Registrar had drafted a decree to which both parties filed objections. In
  view of certain contentions raised by the parties, the matter was remitted
  to the said Registrar for revising the draft of the decree. She has accord-
  ingly prepared a revised draft decree to which again both parties have
H filed objections. We have heard the counsel for both the parties and direct
                                        936
   MOST REV. P.M.A. METROPOLffAN v. MORAN MAR MARrnOMAMATIIEWS 937

that the decree shall be prepared in the following manner.                      A
     In the first instance, the decree shall set out the ten clauses found in
Para 142 of the Judgment.

       Then it shall set out the following portions from Para 141 of the
.Judgment. The first portion in Para 141 starts with the words. "We are,        B
however, of the opinion that in this suit no declaration can be granted
affecting the rights of Parish churches" and ends with the words "any title
to or control over the properties held by the Parish churches". The second
portion in Para 141 begins with the words, "In the state of such a pleading
the only observation" and ends with the words "insofar as the said Constitu-
tion provides for the same".
                                                                                c
     The decree shall then set out Para 150 which deals with Kananaya
church.

      The decree shall then say that the decree passed by the High Court        D
(decree under appeal) shall stand modified to the extent indicated above:

                                 PART II

      In Part II of the order dated March 25, 1996, the following sentence
shall be inserted before the last sentence: "The above direction is subject     E
to the condition that any and every person claiming to hold any office or
post in this church shall be bound by and shall swear allegiance to the 1934
Constitution".

                                 PART III
                                                                                F
      In Part I of the order dated March 25, 1996, we had directed that
Articles 71 and 46, as drafted by us shall stand substituted in the place of
the existing Articles 71 and 46 in the 1934 Constitution with effect from
the date of the said order. In Articles 71 and 46, which were directed to be
so substituted, an error has crept in. Instead of mentioning "members of
the Parish Assembly", the word "families." is used. We, therefore, direct       G
that wherever the word "family" or "families" occur in the said two Articles,
as drafted by us, they shall be substituted by the words "member" or
"members'', as the case may be. It is made clear that when we speak of the
"members" in the said articles, we refer to members as contemplated by
and as mentioned in clause (7) of the 1934 Constitution (which deals with       H
    938                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS                [1997] 1 S.C.R.

A Parish church and Parish Assembly).
           The first Proviso in Article 71 is deleted.                            ~
                                                                                  I.
                                                                                  I

                                      PART IV

B          In view of the aforementioned controversies. it is submitted by the
    counsel for the parties, no elections could so far be held as contemplated
    and d{rected by the Judgment of this Court. In Part I of the order dated
    March 25, 1996, it was directed by this Court that the election of members
    of the Association and the Diocesan Assemblies shall take place within
    three months therefrom on the basis of the amended/substituted Articles
C   7-1 and 46. The time for conducting the said elections is extended upto and
    inclusive of April 30, 1997.

           Ordered accordingly.

    G.N.                                                      Petition ordered.