T RAJAN GENERAL SECRETARY, STEWARD ASSOCIATION IN INDIA, Vs. EBENEZER HIRSING PRESBYTER AND ELDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is Defendant's second appeal.

(2.) APPELLANT , when arraigned as Defendant in OS No.79/2002 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Kollegala, instituted by the respondents for perpetual injunction, restraining the appellant, his agents, sub -ordinates and anybody from interfering with the day to day functioning of the 'elders committee' of the Brethren Assembly, Mission Compound, Kamagere, in the suit schedule property, was resisted by filing written statement, inter alia, contending that letter dated 27.4.2002 addressed to the plaintiffs, was in an effort to bring about a resolution of the dispute between two groups, seeking to conduct prayer meetings in the Church premises. According to the appellant, the Steward Association in India is the Principal Organization owning several immovable properties, in the country, one of which is in Kamagere and on which exists a Church, for more than a Century wherein religious proceedings are conducted by persons known as 'Elders' such as the plaintiffs and others who too having religious bent of mind. It was denied that 'Presbyter' is a post in the Church. It was asserted that plaintiffs, Paulraj, Samuel and others constituted 'A' and 'B' groups and were carrying out Church duties in the congregation every Sunday. Defendant having noticed that the plaintiffs being group -A recognized group -B consisting of Paulraj and others carrying out Church duties during the first two weeks of the month, while group -A discharged duties during the 3rd and 4th weeks of the month and that plaintiffs obtained an order of injunction in OS No.5/1997, restraining the said Paulraj from entering the Assembly and conducting prayers and service, could not be made use of to injunct the other members of group -B from conducting prayer meetings, addressed the suit letter, to assist in bringing about a resolution to the conflict between the two groups. It was specifically denied that letter was in the nature of interference with the discharge of plaintiffs' Church duties, in the matter of conducting prayer meetings.

(3.) THE Trial Court, in the premise of pleadings of parties, framed the following issues.