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

2001 Supreme(Mad) 1142

High Court of Judicature at Madras
A.K. RAJAN
P. Venugopal
Versus
The Music Academy, Madras, represented by its Executive Trustee & Others
O.A. No. 556 of 2001 in Application No. 2890 of 2001 in Civil Suit No. 487 of 2001
Decided On :Decided On : 28-09-2001

Advocates Appeared:
T.V. Ramanujam, Senior Counsel for M/s. T.V. Krishnamachari for Applicant. R. Krishnamoorthy, Senior Counsel for R. 2 Mr. Mohan Parasaran for R. 2 for Respondents.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that any bye-law violative of the Act or Rules made thereunder is invalid, and that the Act and Rules apply to all registered societies.

Headnote:

Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act - Bye-laws - Sections 6, 8, 12, 15, 18 - The court discussed the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, including the constitution of the Committee, appointment and powers of trustees, and the validity of bye-laws 12, 19, 26, 35, and 36. The court emphasized that any bye-law violative of the Act or Rules made thereunder is invalid and that the Act and Rules apply to all registered societies, even those registered under the 1860 Act. The court also considered the powers and functions of the Board of Trustees, the appointment of trustees, and the governance structure of the society.

Fact of the Case:

The plaintiff, a member of a registered society, filed a suit challenging the validity of certain bye-laws and seeking injunctions and reliefs related to the governance and management of the society. The court considered the validity of the bye-laws, the appointment and powers of trustees, and the governance structure of the society.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the bye-laws in question were to be in consonance with the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, and emphasized that any bye-law violative of the Act or Rules made thereunder is invalid. The court dismissed the applications seeking injunctions and reliefs, stating that the Trust Board is not antithetic to the Act and that no injunction can be granted as prayed for.

Issues: The issues involved the validity of the bye-laws, the appointment and powers of trustees, and the governance structure of the society.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that any bye-law violative of the Act or Rules made thereunder is invalid, and that the Act and Rules apply to all registered societies. The court also emphasized that the Trust Board is not antithetic to the Act and that no injunction can be granted as prayed for.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the applications seeking injunctions and reliefs, stating that the Trust Board is not antithetic to the Act and that no injunction can be granted as prayed for.

Judgment :-

1. Plaintiff is the member of the Music Academy which is a society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act.

2. The plaintiff has filed the suit (i) for declaring that the bye-laws 12 (e), 19, 26, 35 and 36 of the defendants-Society are void as they are contrary to the Act and Rules; for mandatory injunction to bring the buy-laws of the Society in consonance with the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975; (ii) for a declaration that the constitution of Board of Trustees consisting of 7 members who are nominated by the Executive Committee for six years is void, as they are contrary to the Act; (iii) for mandatory injunction to constitute the Board of Trustees from among the elected office-bearers; (iv) for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from in any way filling up the vacancies in the Trust Board of the defendant-Society by nomination from among the members who are not elected office-bearers; (v) for a mandatory injunction, not to delegate powers vested with the management of the defendant society which is a non-statutory body; (vi) for mandatory injunction to restrict the powers of the board of trustees; for mandatory injunction to comply with the mandatory provisions of Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 and for further reliefs.

3. Original Application No. 556 of 2001 has been filed for an injunction restraining the respondent/defendant society from in any way filling up the vacancies arising on the retirement of the three trustees from the Trust Board, namely Mr. R. Ramakrishnan, Mr. S. Ramasami and Mr. N. Kumar, retiring on 8.7.2001, 25.8.2001 and 30.9.2001 respectively.

4. Application No. 2890 of 2001, another application, is to direct the defendants to appoint trustees from among the 23 elected office-bearers elected in the Annual General Body Meeting.

5. In the common affidavit filed in support of the Judges summons in the above applications, it is stated that the affairs of the Music Academy are not being conducted as per the provisions of Act and Rules; it does not have an authenticated buy-laws registered with the Registrar of Societies as contemplated under Sections 6 to 8 and 12 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. Music Academy was registered in the year 1929-1930 under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act. After the commencement of the Act, 1975, it is now governed by that Act. Therefore, it is bound to bring the bye-laws in consonance with the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. Music Academy is not in a position to give the correct bye-laws; the affairs of the Society are, in effect, being managed by a single person, namely the Executive Trustee. He is deciding everything and the elected officebearers have no say in the day-to-day affairs of the defendant society. The society has got an elected committee consisting of 23 members. The affairs of the society has to be managed only by the elected body. Section 18 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 only deals with vesting of properties with the trustees. It does not give any right to the trustees to manage the day-to-day affairs of the society and its functions. The Board of Trustees is consisted of 7 members nominated by the committee. Such nomination is not legal. They have to be elected as contemplated under Section 15 of the Act from out of the elected officebearers. The Board of Trustees cannot consist of non-elected members. The trustee can hold office for three years; when the elected committee can hold office for three years, he cannot nominate a person as trustee to hold office for six years. Therefore, byelaws 35 and 36 of the Society giving wide power to the trustees, ultra vires the Act and Rules. Further, the bye-laws makes the Executive Committee subject to the powers of the trustees which is contrary to Section 15 of the Act. Bye-law 18 provides that even the budget prepared by the Executive Committee will be incorporated by the Bo




































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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