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

2007 Supreme(Mad) 1634

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAJESWARAN
A. Samiappan
Versus
The District Registrar Office of the Registrar of Societies Chamiers Road Chennai & Others
W.P.No.41443 of 2005
Decided On : 07-06-2007

For the Petitioner:Hema Sampath, Senior Counsel, S. Venkateswaran, Advocate. For the Respondents:R1, Bhavani Subbarayan, Govt. Advocate, R4, R.Meenal, R3 & R5, R. Nadanasabapathy, Advocates.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that under Sec.36 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975, an enquiry can only be conducted if a majority of the committee members or not less than 1/3rd of the society members apply for it.

Headnote:

Mandamus - Enquiry under Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975 - Sec.36 - [Sec.36 of the Act 27 of 1975] - The court considered the petitioner's request for a writ of mandamus directing an enquiry under Sec.36 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975. The court analyzed the provisions of Sec.36 and concluded that the Registrar may hold an enquiry into the constitution, working, and financial condition of a registered society only if a majority of the committee members or not less than 1/3rd of the society members move an application for such an enquiry. As the petitioner alone sent the notice and representation, the court found no merit in the writ petition and dismissed it.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing an enquiry under Sec.36 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975 into the affairs of a society due to alleged procedural irregularities and financial mismanagement by the 3rd respondent.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner alone sent the notice and representation, and as neither the majority members of the committee nor not less than 1/3rd of the society members applied for an enquiry, the Registrar could not conduct an enquiry under Sec.36 of the Act. Therefore, the court dismissed the writ petition.

Issues: Whether the petitioner's request for a writ of mandamus directing an enquiry under Sec.36 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975 is justified.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that under Sec.36 of the Act, an enquiry can only be conducted if a majority of the committee members or not less than 1/3rd of the society members apply for it. As the petitioner alone sent the notice and representation, the court found no merit in the writ petition and dismissed it.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition as it found no merit in the petitioner's request for a writ of mandamus directing an enquiry under Sec.36 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975.

Judgment :-

This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to conduct an enquiry and pass suitable orders under Sec.36 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975, into the affairs of the Perilovanpati Hindu Nadars (Madras) Uravinmurai (Reg.No.88/67) based on the lawyer notice dated 11. 2005 issued on behalf of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner is a committee member of the 5th respondent society which is registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975 (Act 27 of 1975), hereinafter called the Act. It is the case of the writ petitioner that the 3rd respondent who was elected as a Secretary in 1977 is indulging in a number of procedural irregularities and financial mismanagement. Therefore the petitioner sent a notice dated 11. 2005 to the District Registrar to enquire into the affairs of the society with the powers vested in him under Sec.36 of the Act, 1975.

3. Heard Mrs.Hema Sampath, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate for 1st respondent and the learned counsel for respondents 3 and 5. I have also perused the documents filed in support of their submissions.

4. The only question that arises for consideration is whether the writ petitioner has made out a case to be enquired into by the 1st respondent Registrar under Sec.36 of the Act 27 of 1975. Sec.36 of the Act 27 of 1975 is extracted below for better appreciation:

36.Power of Registrar to inquire into the affairs of registered society:- (1)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 inquiry, into the constitution, working and financial condition of that registered society.

(2)An application to the Registrar under sub-section(2) shall be supported by such evidence as the Registrar may require for the purpose of showing that the applicants have good reason for applying for an inquiry.

(3)The Registrar may require the applicants under sub-section(1) to furnish such security as he thinks fit for the costs of the proposed inquiry, before the inquiry is held.

(4)All expenses of, and incidental or preliminary to, the inquiry shall, where such inquiry is held-

(a)on application, be defrayed by the applicants therefor or out of the assets of the registered society or by the members or officers of the registered society, in such proportions as the Registrar may, by order in writing, direct; and

(b)on the District Collectors or Registrars motion, be defrayed out of the assets of the registered society, and shall be recoverable as an arrear of land revenue.

(5)An order made under sub-section(4) shall, on application, be enforced by any Civil Court having local jurisdiction in the same manner as a decree of such court.

(6)A person holding an inquiry under this section shall at all reasonable times have free access to all the books, accounts and documents of the registered society, and shall have power to call upon, the registered society and the officers of society to produce such books, accounts and documents and furnish such statements and other information in relation to its business as he may direct.

(7)It shall be the duty of all persons who are or have been officers of the registered society to furnish the inquiring officer with all the books, accounts and documents in their custody or power relating to the registered society.

(8)A person holding an inquiry under this section may summon any person who, he has reason to believe, has knowledge of any of the affairs of the registered society and may examine such person on oath and may summon any person to produce any books, accounts or documents belonging t







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