This story is from October 29, 2018

Devotee, cathedral feud is not a consumer issue

Varkey, a Christian, had paid Rs1,001 to the Jacobite Syrian Cathedral on December 31, 1984 for granting permission to construct a family tomb in the cathedral's cemetery.
Devotee, cathedral feud is not a consumer issue
Representative image
Jippy Varkey, a Christian, had paid Rs1,001 to the Jacobite Syrian Cathedral on December 31, 1984 for granting permission to construct a family tomb in the cathedral's cemetery. He constructed the tomb where the mortal remains of his father were placed in 2004.
Jippy alleged the cathedral trustees later destroyed the tomb. So, he approached the consumer forum for direction to permit him to reconstruct the tomb.
1x1 polls
He also claimed compensation.
The forum allowed the complaint, holding Jippy was entitled to reconstruct the family tomb at his own cost. It directed the trustees to extend help and support for reconstruction.
Both Jippy and the trustees were unhappy with the order and appealed to the Kerala State Commission.
The Commission directed the trustees to reconstruct the tomb at the trust's cost. In case of failure to comply with the order, Jippy could reconstruct the tomb and recover 25,000 toward expenses.
In addition, the State Commission also awarded 25,000 to Jippy as compensation.
The trustees filed a revision before the National Commission.
The Commission posed the question whether payment of 1,001 made by Jippy would constitute consideration for hiring the services of the cathedral or its trustees.

The Commission concluded that even if some amount is charged toward granting permission for construction of a family tomb, it would not amount to rendering of a service in the context of the Consumer Protection Act.
By its order of October 25, 2018 delivered by Justice V K Jain, the National Commission held that a devotee availing of a facility from the religious organization to which he belongs cannot be said to be a consumer.
So the complaint was dismissed, holding it was not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act. However, Jippy was given liberty to adopt civil or other legal proceedings for redressal of his grievance.
Conclusion: A dispute between a religious organization and its community member for grant of permission cannot be the subject of a consumer complaint.
(The author is a consumer activist and has won the Govt. of India's National Youth Award for Consumer Protection. His email is jehangir.gai.columnist @outlook.in)
End of Article
FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA