Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K. RAVICHANDRABAABU, J.
Tim Boyd, International President - Applicant
Vs.
Kesiraju Krishna Phani & Ors. - Respondents
Application No.317 of 2015 in C.S.No.682 of 2014
Decided On : 22.07.2015
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order 7 Rule 11 – Rejection of the plaint – Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 – Section 53 – Applicant is the tenth defendant in the above said suit. – This application is filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint. – Respondents 1 and 2 herein as plaintiffs, have filed the above said suit for a declaration to declare that the election of the tenth defendant (applicant herein) as elected President of the first defendant-The Theosophical Society for a period of seven years, as per communication is vitiated by irregularities, mal-practices, null and void and non-est in law and set aside the same. – They have also sought for consequential mandatory injunction, directing the first defendant-Society to recognise and declare the eleventh defendant as duly and legally elected President of the first defendant-Society, by effecting proper announcement and declarations to the organisational set up of the first and second defendants. – Alternatively, the plaintiffs have sought for a suitable direction to the first defendant-Society to conduct fresh elections in the post-nomination stage, to the post of President of the first defendant-Society, as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. – Held, Counsel appearing for the applicant/D10 further relied on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in 1984 (1) SCC 390 (Charan Lal Sahu Vs. Giani Zail Singh), to contend that the present challenge by way of filing the suit, is not maintainable and only the defeated candidate can challenge the same, that too by filing an Election Petition. – A peusal of the above decision of the Apex Court shows that the subject matter "Election" therein was governed under the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections Act and that under Section 14-A therein, an Election Petition can be filed only by a person who was a candidate in the election. – Therefore, it is evident that there is a specific bar under the above statute itself for filing a suit challenging the election, that too by a third party. – Here, in this case, the facts and circumstances disclose that no such specific bar is contemplated either under the Bye-laws of the first defendant-Society or under the relevant statute, namely the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act. – Therefore, the above decision of the Apex Court is not helping the applicant/D10 in any manner. – Senior Counsel appearing for the plaintiffs relied on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1963 SC 1144 (T.P.Daver Vs. Lodge Victoria), to contend that a member of a Society is bound to abide by the Rules/Bye-laws of the Society and they should act strictly in accordance with the said Rules/Bye-laws. – Court find that the plaint in this case in fact discloses the "cause of action" as contemplated under Order 7 Rule 11(a) CPC and consequently, the plaint cannot be rejected as sought for by the applicant/D10 in this application. – Application Dismissed
The applicant is the tenth defendant in the above said suit. This application is filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint.
2. The respondents 1 and 2 herein as plaintiffs, have filed the above said suit for a declaration to declare that the election of the tenth defendant (applicant herein) as elected President of the first defendant-The Theosophical Society for a period of seven years, as per communication dated 27.04.2014, is vitiated by irregularities, mal-practices, null and void and non-est in law and set aside the same. They have also sought for consequential mandatory injunction, directing the first defendant-Society to recognise and declare the eleventh defendant as duly and legally elected President of the first defendant-Society, by effecting proper announcement and declarations to the organisational set up of the first and second defendants. Alternatively, the plaintiffs have sought for a suitable direction to the first defendant-Society to conduct fresh elections in the post-nomination stage, to the post of President of the first defendant-Society, as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975.
3. The case of the plaintiffs, in short, is as follows:
(a) Both the plaintiffs are the members of the first defendant-Society and of the Indian Section Council, Theosophical Society, Varanasi. The first defendant-Society is an international organisation having its international headquarters in Chennai. It is an Association registered under the Central Act No.21 of 1860, now deemed to be registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975.
(b) The General Body of the first defendant-Society is the General Council. Clause 9 of the Memorandum of Association and the Rules and Regulations, 1997 of the first defendant-Society provides that the office of the President shall be for seven years and Clause 10 of the said Rules deals with the election of the President. Total membership of the first defendant-Society is 26,000, out of which, 12,000 to 15,000 are Indians. Following the demise of the President, viz., Mrs. Radha Burnier on 31.10.2013, International Elections were called for as per the Rules and Regulations of the first defendant-Society. The first phase of the election is the nomination phase, where the members of the General Council nominate suitable persons for the post of President. The General Council consists of heads of National Sections, nominated members and International Officers. The President and each National Section Head have three nominations, while the others have only one nomination each. No person who gets less than twelve nominations, is entitled to contest the election.
(c) In the elections concluded on 27.04.2014, only two persons, viz., the tenth and eleventh defendants, got the required number of nominations. The tenth defendant, an American, also happens to be the National President of American Section of the first defendant-Society. During the nomination phase, each National Section Head is required to consult the respective governing bodies and make the nomination thereafter. On 29.12.2013, there was a Council meeting of the Indian Section, convened in Chennai. On that day, the issue regarding nomination was not on the Agenda of the said meeting. However, the General Secretary of the Indian Section, the sixth defendant herein, even before consulting the members of the Indian Section Council, abruptly announced the name of the tenth defendant as his choice for the President without having any prior consultation or deliberation with the Council of the Indian Section. The members of the Council advised him not to nominate only one candidate, but to use all three nominations, of which, at least one should be an Indian. Thereafter, in the Council Meeting, the name of the eleventh defendant was duly proposed and seconded by one Mr.K.V.L.Kanta Rao (Secretary of Rayalaseema Theosophical Federation) and Mr. S.K. Srinivasan (Secretary of the Madras
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
