Karnataka High Court
Chev.K.M.Joseph vs St. Marys Jacobite Syrian on 4 June, 2010
Author: Aravind Kumar
Bench: Aravind Kumar
In THE 1-ma coum or KARNATAKA. jg J: _
mm!) ms 'mm 4%: my 09 mm f£"C§1{}: .';v» % k
BEFORE % % M
'rm HONBLE me.
Batman: &
Chev.K.M.Joa¢'£'h._. %
S/t:K.N!.
Agedabout 74- ' A I
Reaidiflfi M:
1* . j
033; perrrnonzn
(By B%alore Law Asaaciatea)
onzmn .
: ' a Nn.13,__44Qt1een"s_Road,
§3anga1ege.+s6o 052. RESPONDENT
iivkii ' Writ Phtition filed u.n:1e:r Articles 226 and 227 of Coratitutim af India praying In direct the lower tzo izzifiatxe proceedings against respondm for ' dfiobeclienca and judit and decrea passed in 0.3. Na.3538/01 an the file of the VB} addflional City Civil Judge,Bangabrebyaetr?qa,nidat11e?::1pugrmdorder at A dated 14[12I2DO6 in Ex.C.!i'o.799f 06. This Writ Petition aonaim on for Preliminary hanringt&day,thaCou:'£:nadethe£::l1owing:
fiflifi The petitioner is. queatiening :
order dated 1411212005 A Nc.799/ 06 by the vm Addl. "mm" the has beenelaoaed. i
M3433/ace: on the City cm Judge, and irgiunxmion. On came. tn be decreed, whcxretmder, V V' ta mambo: offlk.-. Church and conduct the gucfiessed by the phixxtifi. '1".'na said _ and decree was questioned by the: raspondeat in RFA No.19'!-9I200-4 befiora this Court and by Judmt and Decree. dated 2919:2005 the appeal camembedismiaaad. Q--"""
filed a. special Leave Pefithan mm the A j _ Ccurt in SLP No.24434;2oo5 m dismiuaed by ordm dated 9; 12f2Q05 A the petitionar heroin claimed to sgazgga mum the raspontieut to and on account contmt petition in c.c;%.z%v;5,i dismissed by this a review petition dismsaagz ohm? dated 2/2/2006. After Court by order dated the review psizition and liberty p1aintfi'lpetfl:iomr to file mecution % ygeamn the cm Court.
' ..j_=. '+....'By vh'tue of liberty hem glvan and also in order the damee pansad in 0.8. Ha..'3438]O1, cm No.'799l06 was filed by the petifianer harm1' undm Order 21 Rub 11 C.P.C. O11 Iwxvme' of mfioe, the judmnt-debtor appeamd befort: the a/ Emeutmg Court and mod ita seatwt or % andahofiwafidnvh.
The eotxaemtion of the deer-we- mamas court was that the cotnplieci with the clecme in gr decree. It was per Church Comtimtinzzx, has in
1) The
2) ms A be new ed 5;; be pm"me_>tx1.v'i:1.théGecneral Body.
purpdsa. .... ,.g.f the General Body explained and the agem.
4;m¢.ub,m should be d1acuaae' :1 and mama passed in the Gmwral Body. Sj~.fIhe (3% Body amion should be ' to tha Decree-I-ioldex with a copy ofthe xwohztinn. M 111% utamd as per para 15 of the 3 Secretary 91' the Church by whom:=:;za:_--§#za€za"'~g&$:is§&u accept the membership of % Mam Jacobite Syrian the Exaacution patithn. In of fiefore the mecuting Com'-t? fiudixb dehlnrs have Judgment ma As pea' paragraph 5 ofthe by .:ua%--aebmr tn the 1:6fli§} filed by decree-holder it is ,f'si:a_1_:ed- 'flue Judflnt-debtor has as unnum-
~ mama to: inachxde am mmmittae as the judm--d».-;-.bmm and ' for issuance of show came nodes agahmt mam is devoid af merits andmtcalhdformnfacmammd above and aha taking mm cormicleratian that the decree has been fully aafified. by the decree- hn1derasthem:a1nbm'oftheChurch. CV 'IheExwution Petifianhas to be closed as tm docrecs hen boon a.at$tied." "
6. It in abut stated by the judgmcnt:_deht6f u 'V dacrae--1mkl:er is not being miner cf the chumh and professed by the lmlder to be these to be closed by crder dam :4; 12; ; ' % hiubarak, lasmnfi counsel fin- wauld xdwrate the grounds urged in the ' contended that judmnt and mm % T the man Court has not complied with before the eacwuting Court as to whfleh of the judi and deem has mt ham
8. Per centres, that: Judwnt-debts: on apfiaaxxoe baforee:aec1.1tix1gaourtEadoh_iectionst:aha:::en.t and aha M