Gujarat High Court
Judgename :M.B.SHAH, M.R.CALLA
JAIN MECHANTS CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED - Appellant
Versus
H.U.F.OF MANUBHAI KALYANBHAI SHAH Through Its Manager HARISHBHAI manubhai SHAH - Respondent
S.C.A. 4410 of 1981
Decided On : 08/01/1994
Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925 – Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 – Constitution of India – Article 300a – Allotment of Plot – Petitioner No. 1 is the Co-operative Housing Society originally registered under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925 and later on deemed to have been registered under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (which will be hereinafter referred to as "the Act" ). Petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 are the President and Secretary of the Society respectively. It is the case of the petitioner-Society that Members of the Society are allotted sub-plots from the land acquired by the society and they hold land as lessees from the Society. Respondent No. 2 - Ramanlal jeshingbhai Shah was admitted as a Member of the Society in 1954 on a transfer of shares by one Shri Trikamlal Maneklal and was allotted sub-plot No. 31. Respondents No. 2, subsequently applied to join Respondents No. 3, i. e. Kantaben ramanlal Shah as a joint holder of the plot and she was also admitted as a Member of the Society and thus sub-plot No. 31 was jointly allotted to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 did not construct any building on the said subplot. Respondent No. 2 sent a letter dated 23-1-79 to the Secretary of the society stating therein that he intends to sell the said plot No. 31 to Manubhai kalyanbhai Shahs Hindu Undivided Family of Ashwin Society, Ellis Bridge, Ahmedabad – Held, It clearly postulates the transfer of the plot of land by the existing member in favour of another person, who intends to be and is qualified to become a member. He may acquire membership after completion of the transaction but there is no bar to the transfer of the plot in his favour in case he desires to be a member subject to the condition that he is qualified to be a member of the society. To be more specific, we may observe that the provisions contained in Rule 12 (2) of Rules are in conformity with the rights of the members of the petitionersociety with regard to the transfer of the plot under Article 300a of the Constitution of India and there is nothing in Rule 12 (2) which may seek to impinge upon the societys rights under Art. 19 (1) (c) of the Constitution of India and to this limited extent the decision of the Division Bench in Amreli Dist. Co-op. Sale and purchase Unions case (supra) stands diluted by what has been held by supreme Court in Daman Singhs case (AIR 1985 SC 973), particularly in the end of para 9 thereof after considering the decision reported in AIR 1971 SC 966 – In view of this decision of Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court there is no basis to hold Rule 12 (2) of Rules to be ultra vires of Art. 19 (1) (c) of Constitution of India and while upholding right of respondent No. 2 to transfer the plot in question subject to bye-laws of petitioner-Society we hold that Rule 12 (2) of Rules is intra vires of Article 19 (1) (c) of constitution of India and thus contentions Nos. 3 and 4 are decided accordingly against the petitioner – Order accordingly.
( 1 ) THE petitioner No. 1 is the Co-operative Housing Society originally registered under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925 and later on deemed to have been registered under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (which will be hereinafter referred to as "the Act" ). Petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 are the President and Secretary of the Society respectively. It is the case of the petitioner-Society that Members of the Society are allotted sub-plots from the land acquired by the society and they hold land as lessees from the Society. Respondent No. 2 - Ramanlal jeshingbhai Shah was admitted as a Member of the Society in 1954 on a transfer of shares by one Shri Trikamlal Maneklal and was allotted sub-plot No. 31. Respondents No. 2, subsequently applied to join Respondents No. 3, i. e. Kantaben ramanlal Shah as a joint holder of the plot and she was also admitted as a Member of the Society and thus sub-plot No. 31 was jointly allotted to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 did not construct any building on the said subplot. Respondent No. 2 sent a letter dated 23-1-79 to the Secretary of the society stating therein that he intends to sell the said plot No. 31 to Manubhai kalyanbhai Shahs Hindu Undivided Family of Ashwin Society, Ellis Bridge, ahmedabad. In the aforesaid letter dated 23-1-79 the respondent No. 2 also mentioned that the Managing Committee of the Society in its meeting held on 20-11-63 had resolved that a transfer fee of Rs. 3,000. 00 should be paid for getting a plot transferred in the name of the transferee and further that by Resolution dated 14-4-68 the transfer fee was increased to Rs. 5,000. 00 and on that basis he intended to transfer the aforesaid plot No. 31 to the H. U. F. of Manubhai Kalyanbhai Shah. He also enclosed a cheque of Rs. 5,000. 00 and share certificates for Membership shares no. 311 to 320 and requested that the same be transferred to the above referred h. U. F. Manubhai Kalyanbhai Shah - also sent a letter to the petitioner-Society written on the very same date, i. e. , 23-1-79 stating that he had decided to purchase plot no. 31 from Ramanlal Jeshingbhai Shah, who had agreed to sell the same to him and thus claimed Membership of the Society. The Secretary of the petitioner- society by his letter dated 3-2-79 informed the Respondent No. 2 that there had been no meeting of the Managing Committee on 20-11-63 as alleged by the respondent No. 2 in his letter dated 23-1-79 and further mentioned that according to bye-laws of the Society it was not possible to transfer the plot as requested by him and the cheque of Rs. 5,000. 00 and the 10 share certificates were returned. It was also stated by the petitioner-Society in the earlier correspondence, i. e. , through letter dated 22-2-78 that the respondent No. 2 was also informed that according to the existing bye-laws of the Society, the society was entitled to half premium, i. e. , 50 % of the profit realizable from the transfer of the said sub-plot and that in case of a transfer, which took place in 1973, the Society had received 50 % of the premium. Respondent No. 2 was further informed that ownership of the land vested in the Society and no Member can transfer the plot of his own, without obtaining permission of the Society in writing and that if he intends to transfer the said plot, the Society be informed accordingly and thereupon the Society would invite offers by advertisement and if any such offer is acceptable to the Managing committee, then alone the transfer is permitted. Despite that, the respondent No. 2 by his letter dated 28-3-79 informed the petitioner-Society that he had sold out the above sub-plot to the H. U. F. of Manubhai Kalyanbhai Shah on or about 15-3- 79 by a registered sale deed and requested to effect the transfer of the said subplot in the record of the Society in the name of the said H. U. F. The respondent no. 2 did not obtain the permission of the Society before effecting the said sale an
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.