The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of compliance with the bye-laws of the Society, particularly in the context of the issuance of notices, confirmation of minutes, and the election procedures.

JUDGMENT :

M.G. GIRATKAR, J.

1. First Appeal No. 224 of 2018 is filed by the reporting trustee against the Judgment of Adhoc District Judge-1, Yavatmal, dated 19.12.2009 in M.J.C. No. 72 of 2007. The appellants in First Appeal No. 225 of 2018 are claiming that they are life members of the trust since December, 2005. They have challenged the said Judgment of Adhoc District Judge-1, Yavatmal in M.J.C. No. 72 of 2007, by which the order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner in Appeal No. 29 of 2007 is quashed and set aside and the Judgment of Assistant Charity Commissioner, Yavatmal in C.R. No. 104 of 2006 is restored.

2. The facts giving rise to both the appeals are common and hence, they are disposed off by this common judgment. The material facts, in short, are as under:

Appellant Ramesh Gangadhar Dongre had filed Change Report in respect of Jijau Shikshan Samiti, Yavatmal having Registration No. F/902/Yavatmal and had reported change to the Assistant Charity Commissioner. The Change Report was registered as F-902. Ramakant Kolte, Shankar Sangle, Dinkar Wankhade, Prabhakar Sahastrabuddhe, Anant Atrawalkar, Murlidhar Raut i.e. respondent nos. 16 to 21 (in F.A. No. 224 of 2018) objected the Change Report vide Exh.21. Both the parties adduced their evidence.

3. The Assistant Charity Commissioner recorded its findings holding that the notice for meeting dated 5.12.2005 was not issued before 15 days of the said meeting as per bye-laws of the Society and therefore, induction of new life members i.e. appellants in First Appeal No. 225 of 2018 is illegal. The Election Officer has not conducted proper elections and therefore, Change Report bearing Enquiry No. 104 of 2006 was rejected and the President of the Society was directed to take election inconsonance. The said order was challenged before the Joint Charity Commissioner, Amravati. The joint Charity Commissioner, Amravati in Appeal No. 29 of 2007, vide order dated 13.9.2007 quashed and set aside the Judgment of Assistant Charity Commissioner and accepted the Change Report holding that previously short notices were issued and therefore, notice issued for the meeting dated 5.12.2005 is legal and proper.

4. The objectors challenged the Judgment of Joint Charity Commissioner before the District Judge, Yavatmal by filing M.J.C. No. 72 of 2007. The Adhoc District Judge-1, Yavatmal quashed and set aside the Judgment of Joint Charity Commissioner, Amravati and restored the Judgment of Assistant Charity Commissioner, Yavatmal. Hence, these both appeals by the reporting trustee and newly elected members as per the meeting dated 5.12.2005.

5. Heard Mr. N.S. Deshpande, learned Counsel for the appellants in First Appeal No. 224 of 2018 and Mr. H.D. Marathe, learned Counsel for the appellants in First Appeal No. 225 of 2018. They have submitted that there is no specific provision in the byelaws of the Society as to the election of life members. Learned Counsel have submitted that previously also the notices were issued 2-3 days before the meetings and therefore, there was no illegality in calling the meeting on 5.12.2005. Therefore, the impugned Judgment passed by the Adhoc District Judge-1, Yavatmal in M.J.C. No. 72 of 2007, dated 19.12.2009 is liable to be quashed and set aside.

6. Heard Mr. Anil Kadu, learned Counsel for respondent nos. 16 to 19, 20 and 21 in First Appeal No. 224 of 2018 and for respondent Nos.9 to 14 in First Appeal No. 225 of 2018. He has pointed out evidence of reporting trustee Ramesh Dongre. He has pointed out bye-laws of the Society filed on record at page no. 105. Learned Counsel has submitted that, as per the bye-laws, the period of Executive body was for five years. The election of Executive body is to be held every five years by the members of the General body. He has pointed out clauses (7), (8), (12), (13) and (14) of the bye-laws and submitted that, as per clause (14), the General body meeting is to be called after giving 15 days’ notice once in a year. Mr. Ramesh Do