Co-operative housing society eviction disputes fall within section 91, and succession to tenancy requires clear proof of conversion.

A co-operative housing society's eviction dispute against an occupant in unauthorised occupation falls within section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, because such proceedings touch the society's business and seek recovery of possession of society premises; pending rent law proceedings do not oust that jurisdiction. The Court also found no material to show conversion of an unregistered association into the appellant-company or any agreement creating tenancy in its favour, so the company could not claim tenant rights merely on asserted continuity with the earlier association. The rejection of the jurisdictional objection and the appellant's succession claim was upheld, and the eviction award stood.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether a dispute for eviction of an occupant from premises owned by a co-operative housing society fell within the scope of section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 notwithstanding pending proceedings under the rent law; (ii) whether the appellant-company was merely the successor to the earlier unregistered association and therefore entitled to claim tenancy rights in the suit premises.

Issue (i): whether a dispute for eviction of an occupant from premises owned by a co-operative housing society fell within the scope of section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 notwithstanding pending proceedings under the rent law.

Analysis: A dispute touching the business of a co-operative housing society includes a claim for eviction of a person permitted to occupy society premises on revocation of the licence. Where the society's business includes providing accommodation to members, proceedings under section 91 are maintainable for recovery of possession from an occupant said to be in unauthorised occupation. The pendency of parallel proceedings under the rent law does not bar the jurisdiction conferred by the Act.

Conclusion: The dispute was maintainable under section 91 and the objection to jurisdiction was rejected.

Issue (ii): whether the appellant-company was merely the successor to the earlier unregistered association and therefore entitled to claim tenancy rights in the suit premises.

Analysis: The record did not establish any conversion of the unregistered association into the appellant-company. The company was a separate legal entity and the materials relied upon did not show succession from the earlier bodies or any agreement creating tenancy in its favour. On the facts, the appellant could not claim to have entered the premises as tenant merely by asserting continuity with the earlier association.

Conclusion: The appellant was held to be a distinct legal entity and not a successor to the earlier association, and this contention was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The High Court's refusal to interfere with the award of eviction was upheld, and the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A dispute by a co-operative housing society seeking eviction of an unauthorised occupant from society premises is within section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, and a successor relationship cannot be presumed without clear material showing conversion of an unregistered association into a separate incorporated company.

---