Back
MUKTA GUPTA
Naresh Dayal – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Gymkhana Club Ltd – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mukta Gupta, J. - The present suit has been filed by seven plaintiffs who are all members of defendant No.1 Club in a representative capacity claiming that they are the permanent members of defendant No.1 which has 5553 permanent members, about 4925 person enjoy the facility of the defendant as Green Card holder and about 2305 persons and their spouses and children have been registered as UCP. Claim of the plaintiffs is that the defendant Club which is a non-profit Company by Guarantee was incorporated in 1913 and as per Clause 4 of the Articles of Association, membership of the Club is classified in five categories, i.e., Permanent, Garrison, Temporary, Casual and Special Category. The waiting list of permanent members has been sub- classified into two categories, Government and Non-Government which is in the ratio of 50:50. The total approved Permanent membership is 5600. Besides the membership, the facilities of the Club can be enjoyed by the spouse and dependent members wherein children of the member below the age of 21 years are considered as dependent members. Children of the member up to the age of 13 years can utilize the facilities of the Club when accompanied by t
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the interpretation of the Articles of Association, which falls under the jurisdiction of the civil court, is not within the jurisdiction of th....
The Civil Court lacks jurisdiction over matters under the Companies Act, but the distinction between Stand Members and Club Members requires a full trial to determine rights and jurisdiction.
Power can only be given by the board of directors of the company in exercise of its statutory power by passing the resolution under the provisions of Section 291 of the Companies Act in favour of a d....
The court reaffirmed that civil courts retain jurisdiction over contested ownership of shares and related disputes, despite the company's dissolution and the provisions of the Companies Act restricti....
When a specialized tribunal is empowered by statute to adjudicate disputes involving company oppression and mismanagement, including the authority to grant interim injunctions, the jurisdiction of ci....
The jurisdiction of the Civil Court is not ousted by Section 430 of the Companies Act, 2013, in cases where the dispute involves allegations of fraud and breach of fiduciary duty by an auditor of a c....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
