SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Del) 174

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmohan, Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, JJ.
Sarla Sharma - Appellant
Versus
Delhi Niwas Cghs Ltd. & Anr. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 688 of 2024 & CM Appl. 3057 of 2024
Decided On : 18-01-2024

Advocates appeared:
Mr. J.P. Sengh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vijay Dahiya, Mr. Shashank Sharma and Mr. Naresh Chahar, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate for R-1.
Mr. Karn Bhardwaj, ASC for GNCTD with Mr. Rajat Gaba, Mr. Shubham Singh, Advocates for R-2.

IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that fraudulent and illegal acquisition of membership and possession in a cooperative society, including suppression of material facts and circumvention of legal orders, will not be upheld by the court.

Headnote:

Membership - Dispute over Society Membership - Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 (DCS Act) - Section 116, Section 105 - The court discussed the cancellation of membership of Mr. P.C. Gautam, the subsequent cancellation of conveyance deed by DDA, and the fraudulent grant of membership to the Petitioner. The key legal provisions discussed include the procedure for adjudication of claims under the DCS Act, the validity of membership transfer, and the consequences of illegal possession and membership.

Fact of the Case:

The case involves a dispute over the membership and possession of a flat in a cooperative society. The Petitioner, claiming to be the owner, challenged the order for recovery of possession filed by the society. The court found that the Petitioner's membership and possession were fraudulent and illegal.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Petitioner's membership and possession were fraudulent and illegal, as she had obtained membership during the pendency of legal proceedings and had suppressed material facts about her familial relationship with the original allottee. The court upheld the orders of the Executing Court and the Financial Commissioner, dismissing the petition and the pending application.

Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of the Petitioner's membership and possession, the authenticity of the sale transaction, and the compliance with legal procedures for membership transfer and possession recovery.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Petitioner's membership was void ab initio, as it was granted illegally during the pendency of legal proceedings and without the required permission. The court also found that the sale transaction was a sham, and the Petitioner had suppressed material facts about her relationship with the original allottee.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition and the pending application, upholding the findings of the Executing Court and the Financial Commissioner regarding the fraudulent and illegal nature of the Petitioner's membership and possession.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J.

1. The present Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, impugns the order dated 12.10.2023 passed by the Financial Commissioner in Case No. 106/2021 i.e., the Revision Petition filed under the Section 116 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 (`DCS Act'), by the Petitioner herein.

1.1. The Registrar of Co-operative Society (`RCS') i.e., Respondent No.2 vide its order dated 02.06.2000 cancelled the membership of one Mr. P.C. Gautam from the Respondent No.1, society qua the flat 94-B which is situated in Delhi Niwas CGHS LTD. i.e. Respondent No.1 (`Subject Flat') on the ground that Mr. P.C. Gautam had concealed in his membership application affidavit that his wife also had an allotment in a separate co- operative society. The said order was challenged right upto Supreme Court and was upheld. The said order therefore attained finality.

1.2. In furtherance of the order dated 02.06.2000 the Delhi Development Authority (`DDA') vide order dated 23.04.2007 cancelled the conveyance deed dated 31.12.1998 of Mr. P.C. Gautam with respect to the Subject Flat.

1.3. Mr. P.C. Gautam preferred a writ petition (WP(C) 3623/2007) before this Court against the said order dated 23.04.2007 passed by DDA and this Court vide order dated 29.07.2007 granted stay on the operation of the order dated 23.04.2007.

1.4. In the interregnum the Petitioner herein was made a member of the Society on 03.08.2007 vide Membership certificate no. 5466 on the basis of registered sale deed of 1996 and was issued a share certificate by the erstwhile committee of Respondent No.1 qua the Subject Flat. The said grant of membership was a unilateral act of the Society. It is evident from the record that the pendency of the writ petition (WP(C) 3623/2007) was used to orchestrate the grant of illegal membership in favour of the Petitioner.

Brief Facts

1.5. Mr. P.C. Gautam on 29.07.2010 unconditionally withdrew the writ petition filed before this Court challenging the DDA's order dated 23.04.2007. The order dated 23.04.2007, therefore, attained finality.

1.6. The Respondent No.1 i.e., the Society filed an execution petition in 2011 for recovery of possession of the Subject Flat to enforce the order dated 02.06.2000. Mr. P.C. Gautam expired on 01.08.2020 and thereafter in November, 2020 Respondent No.1 approached this Court vide writ petition (WP(C) 9268/2020). In this writ it was prayed by the Respondent No.1 that in 2011 it had filed an execution petition, but the file of the said petition was not traceable by the RCS. This Court disposed of the said writ with the direction to RCS i.e., Respondent No.2 to reconstruct the file.

1.7. Thereafter the file was reconstructed and numbered as execution petition (Ex. Pet No. 48/2020) under Section 105 of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 2003 (`DCS, Act'), seeking the execution of the order dated 02.06.2000 passed by the RCS i.e. Respondent No.2. The Society sought recovery of the possession of the Subject Flat.

1.8. The Petitioner herein filed her objections in the above-said execution petition, which was dismissed by the RCS i.e., Respondent No.2 vide order dated 13.07.2021. She claimed to be the owner of the Subject Flat and asserted her possession. The Petitioner is the daughter in law of Shri P.C. Gautam and this material fact was not disclosed by her in the objections.

1.9. Against the said order dated 13.07.2021 of the RCS, the Petitioner herein filed revision petition (Revision Petition No. 106/2021), which was dismissed by the Financial Commissioner vide the impugned order dated 12.10.2023.

Arguments of the Petitioner

2. The learned senior counsel for the Petitioner states that Financial Commissioner failed to appreciate that the Petitioner was admitted as a member of the Society i.e., Respondent No.1 vide certificate no. 5466 dated 03.08.2007 in her own right with respect to the Subject Flat on the basis of the registered sale documents in her favour.

2.1. 

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top