ORDER :

1. Special leave granted.

2. This appeal arises from the order of the Bombay High Court dismissing the appellants' Writ Petition No. 5299/89 in limine. The order of the High Court contains no reason . It was the contention of the 1st appellant that Section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 was not attracted by the facts of this case. According to him, he was inducted into the premises by the sister-in-law of one of the Members of the Co-operative Society. The respondents contended that the 1st appellant had no right whatsoever to remain in the premises and that he had not been inducted into by any competent person. It was further contended by the respondents that the 1st appellant paid no rent to the Member. The Cooperative Court found that Section 91 of the Act was attracted. That finding was affirmed by the Tribunal. But neither the Cooperative Court nor the Tribunal discussed or determined the jurisdictional facts to come to a finding that Section 91 of the Act was attracted. There is no finding by the High Court as regards the status of the 1st appellant. Was he a trespasser or a lessee or a person inducted into the premises by someone who had the rig