A person who is interested in the payment of an amount which another is bound to pay and, therefore, pays it, is entitled to be reimbursed by the other person under Section 69 of the Contract Act.

JUDGMENT - Mrs. SUJATA MANOHAR, J.:---The petitioner is a former Chairman of the 1st respondent. Co-operative Housing Society. The petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the judgment and award of the Maharashtra Co-operative Appellate Court, Bombay, dated 31st December 1981 in Appeal No. 517 of 1980. The petitioner had filed an Arbitration Suit No. ABN/760 of 1972 before the Co-operative Court at Bombay to recover from the 1st respondent Society and others a sum of Rs. 20,000/- together with interest as stated therein. The said arbitration suit of the petitioner was decided by the Co-operative Court in favour of the petitioner and the 1st respondent Society was directed to pay the said amount to the petitioner. In appeal, however, the judgment and award of the Co-operative Court was set aside and the claim of the petitioner was dismissed with costs. The present writ petition challenges the decision of the Co-operative Appellate Court.

2. The 1st respondent Co-operative Housing Society owns a building now known as Shivram Sadan and originally known as "Prerana", situate at Antop Hill, Wadala (East), Bombay. Originally one Pareshkumar S. Jain had entered into an agreement for the purchase of the land on which the said building now stands, with the then owner of the land, and had proceeded to construct the said building thereon for the purpose of selling flats on ownership basis to various parties. He had collected various amounts from third parties to whom he had agreed to allot flats in the building. Thereafter the 1st respondent-society entered into an agreement with Pareshkumar Jain dated 26th December, 1966 whereunder the 1st respondent-society agreed to purchase the said land and the building under construction from Pareshkumar Jain on the terms and conditions mentioned in that agreement. Under the agreement Pareshkumar Jain was required to hand over possession of the building to the 1st respondent in the manner provided therein. A certain period was set out within which possession of the building floor wise was to be given to the 1st respondent. A list of flat-owners who had paid various amounts to Pareshkumar Jain for the purchase of flats in the said building was annexed to the said agreement showing the names of such purchasers and the amounts paid by each of them to Pareshkumar Jain. It was provided in the said agreement between the 1st respondent and Pareshkumar Jain that on or before 28th February 1967 the 1st respondent would pay a sum of Rs. 2 lacs to Pareshkumar Jain for the purpose of enabling Pareshkumar Jain to refund to the said purchasers the amounts paid by them to Jain. One such purchaser listed at Serial No. 9 in the said list annexed as Exhibit `C' to the said agreement was Mrs. A. Chellamma, respondent No. 3 herein who was shown as having paid a sum of Rs. 15,500/- to Jain for the purchase of a flat. It seems that Jain did not refund the sum of Rs. 15,500/- to Mrs. Chellamma, and to some other persons with whom we are not concerned. No flat in the building was allotted to Mrs. Chellamma nor was the amount paid by her refunded to her. Ultimately she filed a complaint in the Court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Esplande, Bombay being Case No. 108/S of 1968 against Pareshkumar Jain, the petitioner and two other persons who were office bearers of the 1st respondent society. The accused No. 1 Pareshkumar Jain was charged under section 13 read with section 4 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 as also under section 13 read with section 10 of the Act, and under section 406 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused Nos. 2, 3, and 4 were charged under section 13 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 as also under section 406 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 109 of the Indian Penal Code. The 1st accused Pareshkumar Jain was co

Click Here to Read the rest of this document