Pastor Ambrose vs. Edward Daniel Chandrasekar
Facts
The revision petition was filed by Pastor Ambrose and Jeyaraj Thangavelu challenging an order passed by the IInd Additional Sub Judge, Tiruchirappalli in CMA.No.23/2014 dated 04.11.2015. The High Court had previously directed an Election Officer and Assistant Election Officer to conduct an election. The election was completed on 16.08.2018, and the elected persons took charge. This was reported to the Court. The counsel for the 2nd respondent filed a memo objecting to the election, and the petitioner's counsel and the Assistant Election Officer sought time to file a reply. The Court also directed the North Tamil Conference of Seventh Day Adventists, Thiruchirappalli, to pay additional remuneration to the Election Officer and Assistant Election Officer.
Held
The Court noted that the election was conducted peacefully on 16.08.2018, and the elected persons have taken charge, as reported by both learned counsels and the Assistant Election Officer. The Assistant Election Officer filed a report with documents to this effect. However, the counsel for the 2nd respondent filed a memo objecting to the election. The Court granted time for the petitioner's counsel and the Assistant Election Officer to file a reply to this objection memo. Additionally, the Court directed the Church/North Tamil Conference of Seventh Day Adventists, Thiruchirappalli, to pay an additional remuneration of Rs.5,00,000/- to the Election Officer and Rs.2,00,000/- to the Assistant Election Officer by 24.10.2018. The Court did not decide on the validity of the election in light of the objection memo, as it was adjourned for further proceedings.
Key Issues
1. Whether the election conducted by the Election Officer and Assistant Election Officer was valid and peaceful, as reported to the Court. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner, through their counsel and the Assistant Election Officer, reported that the election was conducted peacefully and the elected persons have taken charge. They sought time to file a reply to the objection memo filed by the 2nd respondent. Revenue/State's contention: Not recorded. The judgment does not contain any arguments from the revenue or state. The 2nd respondent's counsel filed an objection memo to the election conducted.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Juri iction ) Tue ay, the Twenty Fifth day of September Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.V.MURALIDARAN CRP(MD) No.2574 of 2015 1.PASTOR AMBROSE SECRETARY, SOUTH EAST INDIA UNION OF 7TH DAY, ADVENTISTS, HAVING OFFICE AT NO.197, GST ROAD, VANDALOOR, CHENNAI-8. 2.JEYARAJ THANGAVELU, TREASURER OF SOUTH EAST INDIA UNION OF 7TH DAY ADVENTISTS, HAVING OFFICE AT NO.197, GST ROAD, VANDALOOR, CHENNAI - 620 008. ... REVISION PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS 2 &3/ RESPONDENTS 4,5/DEFENDANTS 4,5 Vs 1.EDWARD DANIEL CHANDRASEKAR ...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/ PLAINTIFF
PASRTOR SAM. SUDHAKAR 3.EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS OF THE NORTH TAMIL CONFERENCE OF SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, HAVING OFFICE AT NO.20/2, WILLIAMS ROAD, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI-1. 4.M.JOHN LOUISE ... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4/ RESPONDENTS 1,2&7/DEFENDANTS 1,2 &7 5.PASTOR K.CHELLADURAI
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.