High Court upholds KCT appeal against construction or repairs at Dharma Chakra Centre

SHOULD RESPONDENTS APPLY FOR MODIFICATION, ALTERATION OR VACATION OF ORIGINAL STATUS QUO ORDER, TRIAL COURT SHOULD DECIDE MATTER WITHIN TWO MONTHS, HIGH COURT DIRECTS
GANGTOK, 10 July: The High Court of Sikkim has set-aside the order passed by the District Judge Special Division-II allowing repair works at the Dharma Chakra Centre, Rumtek and further issued directions to maintain status-quo in accordance with an earlier order passed by the trial court on 01 September 2000. It has however left the door open for the State Government and Gyaltsab Rinpoche to approach the Trial Court seeking vacation of the status quo order, which, in turn has been directed to decide on such an application, if filed, within two months.
Chief Justice Permod Kohli states in the order that, “…the status-quo definitely enjoins a duty upon the parties to maintain the position as was in existence on the date of passing of order. Deviation, in any manner amounts to violation of the status-quo order”.
The Karmapa Charitable Trust had filed a First Appeal Order (FAO) in the Sikkim High Court challenging the order passed by the lower court allowing Goshir Gyaltsab Rinpoche to repair damages caused by the 18th September 2011 earthquake, arguing that this was against the order passed by the District and Sessions Court to maintain ‘status quo’ in the Rumtek Dharma Chakra Centre.
Kunzing Shamar Rinpoche had appealed to the High Court to maintain the ‘status quo’ as passed by the District Court in 2000, since the dispute of properties of Dharma Chakra Centre was still pending before the court.
The High Court said that respondents, including Goshir Gyaltsab Rinpoche, were not entitled to carry out any repair without seeking leave of the court or modification/ vacation of the order (of 2000).
The High Court observed that the terms of the order passed by the District Court is not suitable in law, notwithstanding the fact that the plaintiff-appellant had filed a separate application seeking fresh injunction and it was the duty of the trial court to have directed the parties to adhere to the status-quo, which had not been modified or altered in any manner.
Goshir Gyaltsab Rinpoche’s counsel strongly argued that in view of the damage caused to the building under occupation of the Institution, urgent and necessary repair works were required to keep the institution functional and that repair works does not amount to violation of status-quo order.
“Deviation, in any manner amounts to violation of the status quo order. If the respondents were desirous of carrying out any repair urgently needed to the building to keep it habitable and operationsal, it was their duty to approach the trial Court seeking modification/ vacation of the status quo order. This having not been done, the respondents were not entitled to carry out any repair without seeking leave of the Court or modification/ vacation of the order,” the High Court order details.
However, the High Court has given the liberty to the respondents to approach the trial court for modification, alternation or vacation of status-quo on the basis of facts that may be brought to the notice of the court. It further directs that once such an application is made, the Trial Court shall decide the same within two months and even hold day to day hearings for this purpose.