Back
1992 Supreme(Cal) 393
High Court Of Calcutta
HARIDAS DAS
CHARLES MANTOSH - Appellant
Versus
DALHOUSIE INSTITUTE - Respondent
Civil 916 Of 1992
Decided On : 09/25/1992
A.BAKSHI, K.S.ROY, MILON MUKHARJI, MIRANYA CHAUDHARY, PRADIP GHOSH
A club's council cannot remove a member for misconduct without giving the member an opportunity to be heard.
Headnote:
INJUNCTION - CLUB MEMBERSHIP - RULES 20(A) AND (B) AND 32 - SUMMARY OF RULES AND COURT'S DECISION ON GRANTING TEMPORARY INJUNCTION.
Fact of the Case:
Plaintiffs, associate members of Dalhousie Institute, were removed from membership by the club's council without a hearing. They filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction and sought a temporary injunction to restrain the club from giving effect to the removal resolution.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the council's resolution to remove the plaintiffs was invalid because they were not given an opportunity to be heard before the decision was made. The court also held that the club's rule allowing the council to remove members without assigning a reason did not apply in this case because the removal was based on allegations of misconduct.
Issues: 1. Whether the club's council had the authority to remove the plaintiffs from membership without a hearing? 2. Whether the club's rule allowing the council to remove members without assigning a reason applied in this case?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Rule 32 of the club's rules required the council to give members an opportunity to be heard before removing them for misconduct. 2. The council's resolution to remove the plaintiffs was based on allegations of misconduct, so Rule 32 applied.
Final Decision: The court allowed the revisional application and modified the lower appellate court's order. The part of the order restraining the plaintiffs from visiting the club was set aside, and the other part of the order was affirmed. The operation of the order was stayed for four weeks.
( 1 ) THIS Civil Revision application by the plaintiff/petitioners is directed against an order dated 17/03/1992 passed by the learned District Judge, Alipore, in Misc. Appeal No. 70/92 arising out of an application for temporary injunction made by the plaintiffs in Title Suit No. 66/92.
( 2 ) IT appears that the plaintiffs instituted that suit for declaration and permament injunction. The case of the plaintiff's in that suit inter alia is that the defendant No. 1 Dalhousie Institute is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. The defendant No. 1 Institute is a social club of which the plaintiff No. 1 and his wife plaintiff No. 2 are associate member since 1986. The defendant No. 1 hereinafter referred to as the club is administered by a Council comprising defendant Nos. 2 to 9. The defendant No. 2 is the President of this Council while the defendant No. 9 is the Honorary Secretary of that Council, By a letter dated 26/10/1991 being Annexure 'b' to the revisional application the Honorary Secretary informed the plaintiff's that they have been removed from the membership roll of the Institute under Rule 20 (6) of the Institute's Rules and Bye laws with immediate effect.
( 3 ) THE petitioners after instituting the suit on 4/03/1992, also made an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure before the learned Munsif praying for temporary injunction restraining the defendants from giving effect or further effect to the resolution of the Dalhousie Club removing the membership of the petitioners from the said club. The learned Munsif by his order dated 4/03/1992 refused to grant any interim order of injunction. Aggrieved thereby the plaintiffs preferred an appeal being Misc. Appeal No. 70/92 before the learned District Judge at Alipore. On 12/03/1992 an interim order was passed by the learned lower appellate Court directing the respondents not to give effect to the resolution dated 26/10/1991 being Annexure 'c' to the present revisional application until further orders. After final hearing the learned lower appellate Court disposed of the appeal by making the following directions :-the respondents are restrained from giving further effect to the resolution dated 26/10/1991 till the disposal of the suit and the appellants (meaning the petitioners herein) are also restrained from visiting the Institute till the disposal of the suit. The application for temporary injunction pending before the learned Munsif is also deemed to be disposed of and the learned Munsif is directed to take appropriate steps for disposal of the suit finally after giving the respondents an opportunity to file written statement as early as possible. "
( 4 ) WHILE making the above order the learned lower appellate Court pointed out that hearing of the matter in detail after taking evidence was necessary and that till such date effect of the resolution should not be given. The learned lower appellate Court further observed that to avoid disturbance it was desirable that the appellant should not visit the Institute till the disposal of the suit. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 17/03/1992 the plaintiffs have preferred this revisional application.
( 5 ) ON a perusal of the resolution of the Council of the club taken in the meeting held on 26/10/1991 (Annexure 'd') it appears that the Council inter alia adopted the following resolution with regard to the removal of the petitioners from their membership. "mr. Charles Mantosh and Mr. Roy George Mantosh have been disturbing the peace and harmony amongst the members and also normal functioning of the Institute which is not becoming of a member of the Institute. It is therefore unanimously resolved that Mr. Charles Mantosh and Mr. Roy George Mantosh along with their wives be removed from the membership rolls and that they cease to be members with immediate effect of the Institute and sub-rule (b) of Rule 20 of the Rules and Bye-Law
