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

1999 Supreme(Ker) 357

Judges : K.K.USHA,K.NARAYANA KURUP,R.RAJENDRA BABU
Cherthala Agrl.RJX Bank - Appellant
Versus
Joint Registrar - Respondent
Case No : OP.No. 22185 of 1998 & connected cases
Decided On : 09/28/1999
Advocates Appeared :
Kurian Joseph (Sr advocate), K. Ramakumar, C.P. Sudhakara Prasad, D. Somasundaram, T.R. Ramachandran Nair, T.R. Ravi, K. Anilkukar & P.C. Sasidharan For Petitioners Alexander Thomas (Government Pleader) For Respondents

Headnote:

Kerala Co operative Societies Act 1969 Ss.32 & 33 - Consideration - Members - Appointment - Administrators - Above mentioned judgment of Full Bench would operate retrospectively or not - Single Judge before whom above mentioned Writ Petitions came up for hearing found that in very many cases administrators having given membership to several persons and in certain cases such members have contested previous elections as well - It was also found that various members admitted by administrators had obtained loans from societies and are enjoying benefit of membership for over many years - If is declared that those members are not eligible to continue as members that will adversely affect interest of society as well - Judge felt that since question involved is interpretation of effect of judgment of Full Bench referred above it only just and proper that cases are considered by Larger Bench -Held, In present case there is no dispute regarding appointment of administrators but dispute relates to their exercise of certain jurisdiction which they had in them according to the interpretation of binding decision of Court during the relevant period - High Court of Madhya Pradesh while considering power of High Court as Court of record it was observed that the power is inherent elastic unfettered and not subjected to any limit - As observed by Supreme Court is open to Court while exercising flexible power under - Constitution to take such a view as public interest dictates and equity projects - Order according

Judgment :-

K.K. Usha, J.

In Hassan v. Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, 1998 (2) KLT 746, a Full Bench of this Court took the view that the power given to the administrator under sub-s.(4) of S.32 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 to exercise all or any of the functions of the committee would not take in the power to enroll new members to the society. One of the issues raised in O.P. No. 22185/98 and O.P. No. 602/99 is whether the above mentioned judgment of the Full Bench would operate retrospectively or not. A learned Single Judge before whom the above mentioned Writ Petitions came up for hearing found that in very many cases administrators having given membership to several persons and in certain cases such members have contested previous elections as well. It was also found that various members admitted by the administrators had obtained loans from the societies and are enjoying the benefit of membership for over many years. If it is declared that those members arc not eligible to continue as members, that will adversely affect the interest of the society as well. The learned judge felt that since question involved is interpretation of the effect of the judgment of the Full Bench referred above, it is only just and proper that these cases are considered by a Larger Bench. By orders dated 3.3.99 and 15.3.99 a Division Bench referred the above mentioned two Original Petitions for consideration of Full Bench. The other Original Petitions were also referred for the same reason.

2. In O.P.No. 602/99 the petitioner was enrolled as a member of Vallappuza Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. on 6.10.1981 when administrator was in charge of the society. Thereafter, he exercised several rights as a member including voting in the elections at least 4 times. He was elected as a member of the Board of Directors of the Society. The petitioner wanted to contest the election in 1999. He was then informed that his name has been deleted from the draft voters list submitted by the administrator for the reason that he was admitted as a member in the year 1981 by an administrator and that in the light of the Full Bench decision of this Court he cannot be permitted to continue as a member.

3. O.P. No. 13173/99 is filed by Cherthala Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd., its President and members of the Board of Directors. The prayer in the Original Petition is to quash the decision taken by the returning officer removing large number of members from the voters list for the reason that they were admitted by administrators. About 785 persons had been admitted by administrator during the period from 13.2.92 to 12.10.1992. The Committee, subsequently elected, ratified their admission by giving them loans. They were in the voters list and they had voted in the elections in the year 1992 and 1996. Petitioners 3 and 9 had contested in the election and they were elected as board members. The decision to cancel their membership is sought to be justified on the basis of the Full Bench decision of this Court.

4. O.P.No. 14477/99 is filed by the President of Puthur Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. The complaint of the petitioner is that 5065 members of the society are removed from the voters list by the returning officer for the reason that they were enrolled as members during the period from 14.2.1992 to 22.12.1992 by an administrator. It was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that their enrolment was ratified by the elected committee on 7.5.1993 and they were enjoying all the privileges of members. They took part in the election conducted in 1993 and in 1996, two of them were elected as members of the Managing Committee. Such Managing Committee has in turn admitted other members who are allowed to continue without any disqualification.

5. O.P. No. 239/99 is filed by 3 members of Palakkad District Co-operative Hospital. The first petitioner is a life member and petitioners 2 and 3 are ordinary members. There are 4 differe





























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