The main legal point established in the judgment is that statements made in affidavits filed in the course of judicial proceedings before the Registrar of the Cooperative Society, Delhi are entitled to absolute privilege, barring any action for defamation.

1. This order shall dispose of the application filed by the defendant nos. 1, 2, 4 and 6 under Order 7 Rule 11 r/w Section 151 CPC to seek rejection of the plaint.

2. Before I proceed to deal with the genesis of the present application, it would be necessary to give a brief narration of the relevant facts of the present case.

3. The plaintiff is an ex-army officer and a senior citizen belonging to the family of freedom fighters. He became a member of Himachal Pradesh Co-operative Group Housing Society Limited in 1995-96 (herein after called the society). All the defendants are also the members of the society. After having become a member and resident of the said Society, the plaintiff found that the members of the Society had serious objections with regard to the poor quality of construction of the building of the society, late payment of the ground rent and other issues. The plaintiff and the other members of the Society also found that there was an unholy nexus between the management of the Society, consultant and the contractor. They found the hard earned money of the members of the Society being misused by the management committee of the society to benefit the contractor and the consultant. It was also found that the contractor was using substandard material and thus was causing serious loss to the members of the Society. But ignoring all this, the defendant no.1 who was the President of the Society issued a certificate of appreciation to the contractor in the year 2001.

4. To highlight the irregularities and mismanagement on the part of the defendant no.1 and other members of the Managing Committee of the Society (other defendants), the plaintiff along with other members lodged a complaint dated 12.7.2007 with the Registrar Cooperative Society, CBI and other authorities for probing into the affairs of the said Society. The above complaint was signed by 21 members of the society.

5. According to the plaintiff, as a counter blast to the said complaint, the defendant no.1 had issued a show cause notice dated 28.9.2007 to the plaintiff to explain as to why he be not expelled from the membership of the Society. In the said show cause notice, the defendant no.1 allegedly used highly insulting, derogatory and defamatory language against the plaintiff to harm his reputation. The allegations leveled in the notice dated 28.9.2007 were that the plaintiff was found guilty of anti-society activities by making false allegations, that the plaintiff was misleading and dividing the members of the society & that the plaintiff was writing false and frivolous complaints.

6. According to the plaintiff the defendant no. 1 circulated the said notice amongst the members of the society and also pasted it on the notice board of the society.

7. Then, subsequently, in order to pressurize the plaintiff to withdraw the said complaint dated 12.7.2007, the defendant no.1 issued another notice dated 9.10.2007 to the plaintiff alleging that the plaintiff had forged the signatures of the members in the annexure attached with the complaint dated 12.7.2007. The relevant portion of the said notice which is defamatory according to the plaintiff is reproduced as under:-

“However on query from the said some signatories, it was found that certain signatures were forged/ misused and were done in some other context and not in relation to the said complaint to which it was falsely attached. It has also been found that the signatories were kept in dark and were not even aware of the contents of the letters as above”

8. According to the plaintiff, the defendant no. 1 circulated the said notice amongst the members of the society.

9. Thereafter, again to pressurize the plaintiff so that he may not proceed with the complaint against the Society before different statutory bodies, the defendant no. 1 initiated proceedings in the office of the Registrar, Cooperative Society, Delhi, (titled as “M/S Himachal CGHS Ltd. acting through President Ms. Seema Katoch v. B.C. R