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

2005 Supreme(Mad) 149

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MARKANDEY KATJU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. MURUGESAN
S.Thamil Arasan President of Chennai Vyasarpadi Nadar Progressive Association - Appellant
Versus
R.Narayanan & Another - Respondents
W.P.No.No.37647 of 2003
Decided On : 31 January 2005

Advocates Appeared:For The Petitioner:R.Nadanasabapathy, Advocate. For The Respondents:Dr.G.Krishnamurthy, R1, P.Sivamuruganantham, Advocates, R2, P.S.Sivashanmuga sundaram, Addl. Government Pleader.

Filing of civil suit is the only remedy challenging the election of office-bearers of society.

Headnote:Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act (XXVII of 1975), Sec. 36(1)-Challenge to election of office-bearers of the society No provision in the Act to challenge the election-Civil suit may be filed.

Judgment :-

Markandey Katju, J.

This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 18.11.2003 passed by the District Registrar of Societies, Chennai Central. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the impugned order and we are of the opinion that it was wholly illegal and without jurisdiction.

2. It appears that an election for the office bearers of the society known as Chennai Vyasarpadi Nadar Progressive Association was held on 26.10.2003 and that election had been set aside by the District Registrar by the impugned order.

3. When Dr.G.Krishnamurthy, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent was asked as to under which provision the impugned order was passed, he has stated that the impugned order was passed under Section 36 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. Section 36(1) of the said Act states that, "the Registrar may, of his own motion or on the application of a majority of the members of the committee of a registered society or on the application of not less than one-third of the members of that registered society, or, if so moved by the District Collector hold or direct some person authorised by the Registrar by order in writing in this behalf to hold, an enquiry, into the constitution, working and financial condition of that registered society."

4. A perusal of the said provision shows that this provision does not permit any one to challenge the validity of an election held for the office bearers of the society, but only permits the Registrar to inquire into the constitution, working and financial condition of the society. In our opinion, since there is no specific provision permitting the challenge of an election to the society, the only remedy for challenging such election is by means of a civil suit.

5. Hence, it is obvious that the impugned order was wholly illegal and it is hereby set aside. The writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. Consequently, W.P.M.P.No.45724 of 2003 is closed.

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