The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appellant did not entail any disqualification under the relevant sub-rules of R.44(1)(c) read with R.2(d) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969.

Viswanatha Iyer, J.

This appeal is against an interlocutory order passed by the learned Single Judge in C.M.P.No.18082 of 1994 staying all further proceedings pursuant to the memo Ext. P11 dated 13-7-1994 issued by the joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kottayam and the consequential notices Exts. P13 and P14. By the memo Ext. P11, the Joint Registrar directed a meeting of the managing committee of the Kottayam

Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. (a co-operative society registered under the Kerala Cooperative Societies Act, 1969) to be convened within ten days to consider a motion of no-confidence against the President of the Society. The prayer for interim relief was granted by the learned Single Judge, and the fourth respondent in the writ petition has filed this appeal. The basis of the order of the learned Single judge is that the fourth respondent, appellant, who is also a member of the managing committee of the society, was in default to the society in an amount of Rs. 9148/- with interest thereon from 13-12-1990,

that he was not therefore entitled to participate in the discussion of the motion of no-confidence and therefore, there should be a stay of convening of the meeting as directed in Ext. P11. Reliance was placed for this conclusion on R.44(1)(c) read with R.2(d) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969.

2. The petitioner in the original petition as well as the appellant are both members of the managing committee of the Co-operative Society in question, the election to which took place on 28-10-1993. The writ petitioner is the President of the Managing Committee. A no-confidence motion was moved against him, which was directed to be considered at a meeting to be held for that purpose, by the proceedings Ext. P11 dated 13-7-1994. The writ petitioner made a representation Ext. P10 dated 15-7-1994 requesting the Joint Registrar to disqualify the appellant from membership of the managing committee, as a person in default of payment of amounts due to the society. He also prayed for an injunction restraining the appellant from attending the meeting of the committee pending disposal of the representation Ext. P10. The writ petition was filed soon thereafter on 25-7-1994, inter alia for a direction to the Joint Registrar to complete the enquiry on Ext. P10, and to defer the holding of the meeting to consider the motion of no-confidence, till orders are passed on Ext. P10 When the writ petition came up for admission, the learned Single Judge issued notice to the respondents by special messenger for hearing of the petition for interim relief the next day. The impugned order was passed on 26-7-1994, holding that the appellant was a defaulter as per R.44(1)(c) read with R.2(d) of the rules, and consequently staying the holding of the meeting to consider the motion of no confidence. We may at this stage mention that the alleged default and disqualification were of the appellant conclusively declared by the impugned order, though the matter was only at the preliminary stages and even the pleadings of the appellant had not been filed. That has given rise to thisappeal.

3. The appellant is a member of the managing committee of the society. The amount alleged to be due from him is stated to have been due from him even prior to the election on 28-10-1993 from 13-12-1990. Since he is a member of the managing committee of the society, any disqualification to his continuance as a member has to be traced to sub-rule (2) of R.44 of the rules. The relevant provision is clause (c) of sub-rule (2). It states that a member of the managing committee shall cease to hold office, if he is subsequently seen to be disqualified under sub-rule (1) on the date of the election itself. The case of the writ petitioner is that the appellant was disqualified on the date of the election itself by virtue of clause (c) of sub-rule (1) which it will be only appropriate to quote:

"44. Disqualification of membership of committee -

(1) No memb