Back
1990 Supreme(Del) 154
High Court Of Delhi
GURBACHAN SINOH - Appellant
Versus
REHABILITATION MINISTRY EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE HOUSEBUILDING SOCIETY LIMITED - Respondent
Civil 2365 of 1986
Decided On : 05/11/1990
Rakesh Munjal, S.P.Mahajan
The absence of a person's name from the register of members of a cooperative society is not conclusive proof that the person is not a member.
Headnote:
COOPERATIVE SOCIETY - MEMBERSHIP - ARBITRATION - DISPUTE BETWEEN MEMBER AND SOCIETY - REFERENCE TO ARBITRATION - VALIDITY - CONDITIONS FOR ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP - PROOF OF MEMBERSHIP - REGISTER OF MEMBERS - PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE - ABSENCE OF NAME FROM REGISTER - NOT CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF NON-MEMBERSHIP - REFUND OF DEPOSITED AMOUNT - EFFECT ON MEMBERSHIP - LIMITATION FOR FILING ARBITRATION APPLICATION - COMMENCEMENT OF LIMITATION PERIOD - NOTICE IN NEWSPAPER - SUFFICIENCY.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an employee of the Ministry of Rehabilitation, deposited Rs. 1605 with the respondent society for membership and purchase of land. He claimed to have submitted an application and an affidavit along with the payment, but the society denied receiving any such application. The petitioner's membership was later canceled without any notice or show-cause notice. The petitioner moved an application for arbitration before the Deputy Registrar (Arbitration), who referred the dispute to an arbitrator. The Lieutenant Governor, Delhi, set aside the order of the Deputy Registrar on the ground that the petitioner was not a member of the society. The petitioner challenged this order in the High Court.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that the petitioner had prima facie evidence of membership in the society, as he had deposited the admission fee, share money, and land cost. The absence of his name from the register of members was not conclusive proof of non-membership. The court also held that the petitioner's application for arbitration was within the limitation period, as the society had not sent him any notice of the cancellation of his membership. The court set aside the order of the Lieutenant Governor and directed the arbitrator to proceed with the arbitration.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner was a member of the respondent society. 2. Whether the dispute between the petitioner and the society was arbitrable. 3. Whether the petitioner's application for arbitration was barred by limitation.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Membership in a cooperative society is acquired by admission to membership after registration of the society in accordance with the Act, Rules, and Bye-laws. 2. A dispute between a member and a society is arbitrable if it arises out of the relationship between them. 3. The limitation period for filing an arbitration application begins to run from the date on which the cause of action arises. In the present case, the cause of action arose when the society canceled the petitioner's membership without notice. The petitioner's application for arbitration was filed within six years from that date.
Final Decision: The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order of the Lieutenant Governor, and directed the arbitrator to proceed with the arbitration.
( 1 ) OURBACHAN Singh has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other writ or directions thereby quashing the order dated May 17, 1989 of Lieutenant Governor, Delhi in case No. 20/85-CA. He has further prayed for an appropriate direction declaring that the order dated January 9, 1985 by Deputy Registrar, Delhi in Case No. F-DR/arb. /coop. /64 is valid. He has further prayed for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction to respondent No. 2 to continue and proceed with the arbitration proceedings.
( 2 ) IT would be necessary to narrate the relevant facts leading to the filing of this petition. Rehabilitation Ministry Employees Cooperative House Building Society Limited (hereinafter to be referred to as the society ) respondent no. 1 was formed for the benefits of the employees of the Rehabilitation Ministry. One of the main objects of the Society was to acquire either through outright purchase or on lease land for the construction of houses for giving to the members or for allotment to its members.
( 3 ) THE petitioner was an employee of the Ministry of Rehabilitation and was inducted as a member of the said Society. The petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 5. 00 as admission fee and Rs. 1600. 00 as share money vide receipt dated June 7,1966. He moved an application dated June 7, 1966 along with a covering letter of even date and an affidavit for being enrolled as a member of the Society. After the approval of the request of the petitioner for being enrolled as a member, he was issued a regular stamped receipt dated October 17, 1966 for a sum of Rs. 1600. 00 towards the first instalment of the purchase of land. The General Body of this Society held a meeting on July 8, 1970 in which a decision was taken that all persons who had made applications for membership of the Society upto December 31, 1969 will be admitted as members of the Society. The petitioner was posted outside Delhi and so was not in a position to remain in constant touch with the Society. The membership of the petitioner was cancelled by the Administrator of the Society vide order dated July 1, 1976 for no valid reasons and without giving any show-cause notice to the petitioner.
( 4 ) THE petitioner came to know that the Society will be allotting plots only to those persons who are residents of Delhi and so vide letter dated June 21, 198 3 he requested the Society for transfer of his share money to the account of Shri O. P. Aggarwal, another member. The Society, however, declined to do so and rather sent a cheque for Rs. 1600. 00 in favour of the petitioner. In the meantime, Gurbachan Singh, petitioner came to know that there was no rule as such for the allotment of plots only to those members who were residents of Delhi and so he did not accept the cheque for the refund of a sum of Rs. 1600. 00 deposited by him earlier with the Society.
( 5 ) IT is the case of the petitioner that the Society was now bent upon cancelling his membership on account of which he moved an application in the office of the Deputy Registrar (Arbitration) Cooperative Society, Old Sectt. , New Delhi. This application was decided by the Deputy Registrar (Arbitration) vide order dated January 5, 1989 and the disputes between the parties were referred to Major General H. N. Shivgar. The Arbitrator entered reference and proceedings were adjourned at the request of respondent No. 1. In the meantime, respondent no. 1 Society moved a revision petition before Lieutenant Governor, Delhi under Section 80 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the act ). The order of the Deputy Registrar had been set aside by the Lieutenant Governor, Delhi vide the impugned order dated May 17,1985.
( 6 ) THIS writ petition has been contested by respondent no. 1 Society and It has, inter alia, been pleaded that the petitioner had never been admitted as a member of the
