TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (4) TMI 572
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and was allotted to the society by the Department of Rehabilitation by the letter dated 26.5.1970 under the Displaced Persons (Rehabilitation & Compensation) Act, 1954. The society took steps for allotment of plots to its members and in that connection various kinds of disputes regarding disqualification, eligibility, seniority, etc. of the members were raised. These disputes were decided by the Registrar, against whose decision revisions were filed, which were decided by the Financial Commissioner. The decision of the Financial Commissioner was challenged by filing writ petitions by the members of the society and in some cases by the society itself. All these writ petitions have been decided by the common judgment and order dated 28.2.2001 of the High Court, which is the subject matter of challenge in the present appeals. The eligibility of a member to get a plot from the society or his disqualification has to be examined having regard to the provisions of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules , 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), bye-laws of the society and an earlier litigation concerning allotment of land wherein a settlement had been arrived at during the pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ative society within 3 months and when the co- operative society is already under liquidation, the amount due to him will be credited as a debt due to a third party from the co-operative society. (4) If any question as to whether a member has incurred any of the disqualifications referred to in sub-rule (1) arises, it shall be referred to the Registrar for decision. His decision shall be final and binding on all concerned. The power of the Registrar under this rule shall not be delegated to any other person appointed to assist the Registrar." The society in question is admittedly a housing society and, therefore, Rule 25(1)(c) is applicable to it. According to clause (i) of this sub-rule, no person shall be eligible for admission as a member of the society in question if he owns a residential house or a plot of land for construction of a residential house in any of the approved or unapproved colonies or other localities in the Union Territory of Delhi either in his own name or in the name of his spouse or any of his dependent children on leasehold or freehold basis. The proviso appended to this sub-rule makes an exception in case of persons who are only co-sharers of joint a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve acquired all the rights and incurred all the obligations and liabilities of member of the society, as laid down in the Cooperative Societies Act, the Rules made thereunder and these bye-laws. (v) Application for admission as member and for allotment of shares shall be made to the Secretary in the form, prescribed by the society for the purpose. Every such application shall be disposed off by the Managing Committee who shall have power to grant admission or to refuse it after recording reasons for such refusal, provided, however, that any person whose application has been refused by the Managing Committee may prefer an appeal within 30 days to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies. The decision of the Registrar shall be final. (vi) The Society shall not admit member one month prior to the date of his General Body." Clause (e) of bye-law no.5(1) lays down that no person shall be eligible to be a member, if he or his wife (or her husband in a case of a woman) or any of his/her dependent owns a plot or a dwelling house in Delhi. That apart, every person seeking membership of the society has to sign a declaration to the effect that he or his wife (she or her husband) or any of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was allowed by the High Court of Delhi and in accordance with the bye-laws of the society as then prevailing. The verification with regard to the individual membership shall be done by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies who will issue a verification certificate before the allotment is actually made to an individual member. (v)xxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx (vi)xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx (vii) The Society shall maintain proper registers of membership and have its accounts audited from time to time as prescribed by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies. It shall submit to the Department of Rehabilitation every three months a statement in regard to the progress of development and allotment of plots to the bonafide members of Society in accordance with its bye-laws." The condition imposed in the agreement provided that no member of the society, who himself or herself or through his parents, husband/wife, children, etc. had obtained any house or plot from the Department of Rehabilitation earlier, shall again be allotted a plot in the developed land. The other condition imposed was that no member of the society, who already owns a plot or a house in his own name or in the name....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (Civil) No.3762 of 1981, which have been quoted above, any member of the society who had obtained any house or a plot from the Department of Rehabilitation earlier, cannot again be allotted a plot. That apart as on the date when he acquired membership of the society, he was ineligible and was debarred from becoming a member thereof and further he did not file a correct affidavit. The High Court was, therefore, justified in allowing the writ petition filed by the society and quashing the order of the Financial Commissioner. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Civil Appeal No of 2003 (@ SLP (C) No.7713 of 2001) Hari Singh Mongia v. Rehabilitation Ministry Employees Cooperative House Building Society & Ors. The society had issued a show cause notice to the appellant, Hari Singh Mongia, on 13.11.1991 to the effect that he was disqualified and was ineligible for allotment, as property No.F-25, Kalkaji, New Delhi, was allotted to his father Shri Santokh Singh Mongia against verified claim of property left by him in Pakistan. The appellant admitted the fact that his father Shri Santokh Singh had been allotted property No.F-25, Kalkaji, New Delhi. He, however, submitted that the total a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... husband nor her husband's parents had been allotted any plot. The Registrar held that the appellant was disqualified but the revision preferred by the appellant was allowed by the Financial Commissioner. The High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the society, quashed the order of the Financial Commissioner and restored that of the Registrar. The material on record clearly showed that property No.A-431 and A-432, Kalkaji, New Delhi, was allotted to Smt. Vasheshran Devi, who was mother of Shri Kewal Krishan Bahl, by the Ministry of Rehabilitation out of compensation pool on account of her being a displaced person. Copies of the lease deed and the conveyance deed placed before the Registrar established the said fact and the record of Municipal Council showed that she was being assessed for property tax. In view of the aforesaid fact, Shri Kewal Krishan Bahl could not have been allotted a plot as his mother had obtained a house from the Department of Rehabilitation earlier. The appellant having come into picture after the death of Shri Kewal Krishan Bahl as a nominee member cannot have better rights than her husband. Since the husband of the appellant could not have been a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....preferred by the appellant is accordingly dismissed. Civil Appeal No of 2003 (@ SLP (C) No.5242 of 2001) Gurbachan Singh v. Rehabilitation Ministry Employees Cooperative House Building Society & Ors. The controversy raised in this appeal is about the initial membership of the appellant in the society. The appellant claims that as an employee in the Ministry of Rehabilitation, he deposited ₹ 1,605/- on 7.6.1966 with one Lachman Dass, a member of the society, who received the documents and the amount on behalf of the society. An Administrator had been appointed on 29.6.1976, who made a noting that the file of appellant was blank. In pursuance of the directions issued by the High Court in a writ petition filed by the appellant, the matter was referred for arbitration. The Deputy Registrar (Arbitration), after examining Lachman Dass as well as Shri J.B. Mittal, the then Secretary of the Society, and after examining other material produced by the parties, held that the appellant had not submitted any application with necessary affidavit for enrolment as member of the society and consequently rejected his claim vide order dated 2.2.1995. The appeal preferred by the appellant was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tigation. The appellant did not file his own affidavit in reply to the writ petition filed by the society. On the contrary, the affidavit has been filed by one Shri Rajan Aggarwal son of Shri Om Prakash Aggarwal in whose favour the appellant wanted adjustment of his amount which was deposited by him. The affidavit has been filed on the basis of a power of attorney. It was on these findings that the High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the society and set aside the order passed by the Tribunal. Having considered the submission made by learned counsel for the parties and the material on record, we are of the opinion that the High Court rightly set aside the order passed by the Cooperative Tribunal as it had not adverted to the main issue, namely, whether the appellant had submitted any application form and necessary affidavit for enrolment as member of the society. The mere fact that some money was deposited by the appellant with Lachman Dass on 7.6.1966 would not entitle him to claim membership of the society. That apart, the society had refunded the amount through cheque dated 28.6.1983 when the appellant sent a letter that the money be adjusted in the account of Shri Om ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was given membership No.630. Shri K.N. Kapoor was enrolled as member on 26.3.1971 and thereafter he deposited the share money and was given membership No.657. The Managing Committee of the society, on a direction of the Registrar, reviewed all memberships and passed a resolution on 22.3.1974 approving the appellant amongst others as member of the society. The administrator of the society also, after consideration of the material on record, approved the name of the appellant on 9.8.1976. In view of these facts we are of the opinion that the High Court erred in altering the seniority of the appellant and placing his name at Sr. No.34 instead of Sr. No.33. That apart Shri KN Kapoor had not impleaded the appellant as a party to the writ petition and in his absence no order adverse to his interest could have been passed. The appeal preferred by the appellant is therefore allowed and the order passed by the High Court is modified to the extent that the appellant shall be placed at Sr. No.33 and Sh. KN Kapoor shall be placed at Sr. No.34 in the seniority list. So far as the appeal preferred by Sh. KN Kapoor is concerned we do not find any ground to take a view different from what has been....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....olding that expulsion of all the 36 members including the appellant was invalid. The appeal preferred by the society was dismissed by the Delhi Co-operative Tribunal on 20.6.1984 and the writ petition preferred against the said order was also dismissed by the High Court on 8.3.1985. During this period fresh notices were given by the society to the appellant and others alleging that they had committed default in payment of the amount. The General Body thereafter passed a resolution expelling the appellant and three others which was approved by the Registrar by an order dated 9.8.1985. The appellant preferred an appeal under Section 76 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act before the Lieutenant Governor which was allowed on 7.8.1986 and the resolution passed by the society for expulsion of the appellant and three others was set aside. Feeling aggrieved by the decision of the Lieutenant-Governor the society preferred Writ Petitions No.1129 to 1132 of 1987 which were dismissed by the High Court on 11.5.1990. The Special Leave Petitions filed by the society were dismissed by this Court on 20.12.1990. Thereafter, the Managing Committee of the society passed a resolution on 3.6.1991 reso....