Jaishree Thakur, J.

The present dispute in these two writ petitions arises out of election to be held for registered society known as Shri Oswal Singh Sabha, Jodhpur registered under the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958 (for short "the Act of 1958"). As per clause 6(i) of the constitution of society, the term of the elected body is three years and thereafter elections are to be held. One Dr. Mahendra Surana was elected as Chairman, Mr. Mahendra Bhansali was elected as General Secretary, Mr. Rajesh Bagrecha was elected as Joint General Secretary of Shri Oswal Singh Sabha for a period of three years in elections held on 19.4.2009 and 24.5.2009. On account of personal and unavoidable reasons, the Chairman Dr. Mahendra Surana tendered his resignation on 27.2.2010 and similarly General Secretary Mr. Mahendra Bhansali also tendered his resignation on 20.3.2010. The said resignations of the Chairman and the General Secretary were to be placed in the general meeting of the society but before the resignation could be accepted it was withdrawn by Mr. Mahendra Bhansali on 22.4.2010. In the meantime, an objection was raised about dual membership of the Vice Chairman Shri Bhoor Chand Jeerawala and Shri Rai Chand Bhansali. On 20.5.2010, the membership of Mr. Bhoor Chand Jeerawala and Mr. Rai Chand Bhansali came to be terminated. In the subsequent meeting of General Body of the society held on 13.6.2010, the resignation of Dr. Mahendra Surana was rejected but on 16.6.2010, Mr. Magh Raj Singhvi, impersonating himself to be Election Officer, issued a notice dated 16.6.2010 for holding the election of vacant posts of President and General Secretary on 18.7.2010. A suit was filed by the Shri Oswal Singh Sabha through Mr. Mahendra Bhansali for a declaration that notice dated 16.6.2010 (for holding election of vacant posts of President and General Secretary) be declared as void ab initio, as Mr. Magh Raj Singhvi, defendant no.2 in the suit, had no right or authority to issue a notice. Along with the suit, an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2,C.P.C. was filed. The prayer in the suit was primarily against the notice dated 16.6.2010 calling for election of President and General Secretary and for declaration that the said notice is illegal. The prayer made in the application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. was for seeking temporary injunction that till the decision of the original suit, no election should be held pursuant to the notice dated 16.6.2010.

2. Reply was filed in the main suit itself and the lower court by an order dated 27.7.2010 while noting that elections had been held on 18.7.2010, directed that status quo be maintained and result be kept in a sealed cover. In appeal, the impugned order dated 27.7.2010 was set aside and the appeal was allowed. Aggrieved against the dismissal of the application filed, S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11762/2010 has been filed.

3. It is contended by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the order passed by the Additional District Judge is wholly erroneous since the appellate court failed to appreciate the fact that the impugned notice dated 16.6.2010 had been issued by Mr. Magh Raj Singhvi impersonating himself to be the Election Officer. Moreover, the posts of President and General Secretary were not lying vacant as Mr. Mahendra Bhansali had withdrawn his resignation on 22.4.2010 and the resignation submitted by Dr. Mahendra Surana was rejected by the petitioner- Shri Oswal Singh Sabha in its meeting held on 13.6.2010. Resultantly, since the posts of President and General Secretary were not lying vacant, there was no occasion for holding the election to the said posts. Moreover, it is argued that instead of limiting itself to the validity of the order passed on application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C., the appellate court has proceeded to give an opinion on the merits of the suit and such observations are wholly unwarranted.

4. Per contra, learn