AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V. Jagannathan, J.—This appeal is disposed of after hearing both sides finally.
The appellants are the plaintiffs in the trial court and they are aggrieved by the I.A. filed by them being rejected and the said I.A was filed for staying the operation and execution of the expulsion order dated 1.6.2009 passed by the Ist defendant India Evangelical Lutheran Church (IELC).
Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellants were expelled from the IELC by the defendants without giving an opportunity to the appellants to make their say and no notice was given to the appellants before the impugned order of expulsion was passed by the Ist defendant. Therefore, the trial court was in error in refusing to grant stay of the expulsion order.
On the other hand, submission of the learned Counsel for the respondents is that there is an appeal provision as per the bye laws of IELC and the plaintiffs without having taken recourse to the said remedy, have approached the trial court and therefore the learned Judge of the trial court has rightly dismissed the application filed and moreover-having thus expelled the appellants from the IELC, the trial court cannot even grant the final relief in the matter and as such, the question of granting any interim order does not arise.
Having thus heard both sides and in view of the trial court also having reproduced the appeal provision at page 23 of the impugned order, the remedy for the appellants is to approach the Appeal Committee and question the expulsion order even on the ground of appellants being not given an opportunity to make their say before the said order was passed.
Moreover the trial court has also noted that even u/s 41 of the Specific Relief Act, when other remedies are available the court will not grant an injunction.
In the instant case in view of the appellants having not availed the remedy available by approaching the Appeal Committee as per the IELC bye-laws. I am of the view that the impugned order does not call for any interference. However, it is also made clear that the respondents shall furnish all the necessary details to the appellants for approaching the Appeal Committee and the appeal, if any preferred by the appellants, be considered by the respondents in accordance with the bye laws applicable to the respondents IELC. The dismissal of the present appeal will not come in the way of the matter being dealt with the Appeal Committee in accordance with the rules and regulations governing the 1st respondent. In the event of the appellants approaching the Appeal Committee the Appeal Committee shall dispose of the matter within three months.
The appeal stands disposed of in the above terms.