BASELIUS MAR THOMA MATHEWS & ORS. versus PAULOSE MAR ATHANASIUS &. ORS.

Citation: [1980] 1 S.C.R. 250 · Decided: 09-08-1979 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.R. KRISHNA IYER · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
250 
BASELIUS MAR THOMA MATHEWS & ORS. 
v. 
PAULOSE MAR ATHANASIUS &. ORS. 
August 9, 1979 
(V. R. KRISHNA IYER AND P. N. SHINGHAL, JJ.J 
Code of Civil Procedure-S. 24(1)(b)-High Court when can 
withdraw 
suits from a lon'er court and itself try them. 
A large number of suits filed by a religious community in the State were 
pending over the years in several courts. Considering the prolongation and 
C 
plurality of cases and the deleterious social consequences resulting from such 
litigation the High Court and the State Government selected eight of the most 
significant suits and constituted an Additional District Court to try them. After 
the court had recorded evidence of numerous witnesses and before the com-
mencement of arguments a petition under s. 24(1)(b) of the Code of Civil 
Procedure was presented to the High Court for withdrawal of the suits ~o the 
file of the High Court. This was dismissed by the High Court. 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H -
On the qtiestion whether at this stage and in these circumstances the suibl 
should be called up to the High Court and disposed of 
Allowing the appeal, 
HELD: Advancement of public justice will be promoted by the High Court 
itself at this stage, proceeding to hear the suits. All the suits should be trans~ 
fcrred to the High Court and, tried from the present stage, 
since expeditious 
tern1ination is the driving force behind this order for transfer. [253H] 
\Vhat is more important in a case of this kind is shortening the longevity 
of these quasi-public litigations, reducing the enormous expenditure involved 
for both si<les and entrusting the first determination to the highest deck of 
justice in the State. The case involves questions of public moment which are 
likely to spiral~p to the Supreme Court on appeal. In this jurisdiction, the 
approach has to be pragmatic, not theoretic, without whittling down the basic3 
of law bearing on transfer of cases. Where a large number of people 
are 
affected and the fate of a few hundred suits and 
a thousand churches are 
involved, the elimination of some years and duplication of bearings and full 
argun1ents at the commanding height of the High Court is a wise measure, all 
things considered. The social savings of abbreviation of law's 
delays 
ar~ 
important to social justice. [253B, D, G] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal 
No. 
2222 of 
1979. 
Appeal by Special Leave from Judgment and Order dated 
4-7-1979 of the Kerala High Court in CMP (Transfer) No. 5069/79. 
F. S. Narimitn and K. R. Nambiar for the Appellants. 
' 
• 
f 
• 
• 
B. M. T. MATHEWS & ORS. V. P. M. ATHANASIUS & ORS. 
251 
(Krishna Iyer, !.) 
V. M. Tarkunde, P. P. John and N. Sudhakaran for RR 18 and 20. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
KRISHNA IYER, J.-The Malankara Sa,bha, on the Kerala Coast, 
is an ancient Church with a legendary past, and has a phenomenal 
following of a million Md a half Orthodox Syrian Christians with 
over a thousand parish churches to nourish the spiritual life of the 
flock. 
Schismatic pathology which ordinarily afllicts 
secular 
insti-
tutions struck this ecclesiastical organisation resulting, inter alia 
in 
bitter litigative battles of several years standing. 
Some 
250 
suits, 
manifesting this litigious syndrome, are stated to be pending in the 
several courts of Kerala. 
The members of this chnrch are not new 
to forensic struggles and have, on earlier occasions, fought right up 
to the Supreme Court. 
The prolongation of such plurality of court 
cases in a community at once influential, important and . numerous, 
has many deleterious social consequences and it was wise of the 
High Court and. the Government of Kerala to have thougl1t in terms 
of selecting eight of the most significant suits out of the spate of 
cases and constituting an 'Additional District Court' specially for dis-
posal of these socially sensitive cases. 
Thanks to 
this 
imaginative 
measure the eight suits which were 
made over to 
the 
specially 
appointed District Judge made headway 
steadily 
forwards. 
An 
Additional District Judge, by name, Shri N. Vishwanath Iyer was 
first put in charge of these suits and he examined several witnesses. 
When he was transferred from Ernakulam, which is the venne of 
the District Court, another judicial officer by name, Shri S. Anantha-
subramanilll1 was posted in his place. 
The latter kept up the pro-
gress of the case and actually finished recording the entire evidence. 
Hardly had the arguments 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.