Violation of natural justice in decision-making process

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Second Appeal has been filed under Section 100 of CPC against the Judgment and Decree dated 12.11.2007 passed in A.S.No.515 of 2006 on the file of the 1st Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 27.02.2006 passed in O.S.No.2593 of 2002 on the file of XIII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.)

1. Challenge in this second appeal is made to the Judgment and Decree dated 12.11.2007 passed in A.S.No.515 of 2006 on the file of the 1st Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 27.02.2006 passed in O.S.No.2593 of 2002 on the file of the XIII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings in the trial Court.

3. The plaintiff in O.S.No.2593 of 2002 is the appellant in the second appeal.

4. Suit for Declaration and Permanent Injunction.

5. Briefly stated, according to the plaintiff, the defendant’s society is formed for the welfare of the members of Gaur Community and it is governed by the Bye Laws of the defendant’s society and the plaintiff was an active member of the defendant’s Sabha for several years and the defendant convened a meeting of the committee on 17.03.2002 for discussing the date, venue and modalities to be followed for celebrating the Holi Festival and the said meeting however could not be conducted as there was no requisite quorum and the meeting was adjourned to 24.03.2002, for which, the notice was issued by the President on 18.03.2002. However, the plaintiff was shocked to receive a separate communication from the President of the defendant’s Sabha calling upon the plaintiff to explain his alleged misbehaviour at the meeting held on 17.03.2002. The plaintiff was at a loss to understand as to what was the act of misconduct alleged against him and sent a reply denying the allegations and pointing out that no valid meeting was conducted on 17.03.2002 and also sought for an apology from the President of the defendant’s Sabha for tarnishing his image in the eyes of the members of the Sabha. Despite the same, a meeting was convened by the defendant’s Sabha on 05.04.2002, for which, notice was received by the plaintiff on the previous date and the plaintiff could not attend the said meeting due to insufficient notice and in the abovesaid meeting, an unilateral decision was taken to drop the plaintiff from the Committee for the remaining period and the defendant’s sabha suspended the plaintiff from the membership of the Sabha for one year and the same was communicated to the plaintiff vide letter dated 05.04.2002. The abovesaid decision of the committee is ultra vires of the Bye Laws of the Sabha and the abovesaid decision has been taken without providing adequate opportunity to the plaintiff to put forth his case and with a view to get rid of the plaintiff from the committee, the abovesaid decision had been taken without giving any notice and against the principles of natural justice and hence, the plaintiff issued a legal notice on 17.04.2002 through his advocate demanding the withdrawal of the abovesaid decision as communicated in the letter dated 05.04.2002 and as there was no compliance of the same on the part of the defendant, according to the plaintiff, he has been necessitated to institute the suit for appropriate reliefs.

6. The defendant sabha resisted the plaintiff’s suit contending that the plaintiff’s suit is not maintainable either in law or on facts and the defendant’s society has been formed for the welfare of the members of the Gaur Brahmin Community. The Executive Committee meeting of the defendant’s Sabha was held on 17.03.2002 and without waiting for the completion of the meeting, the plaintiff had been insisting to adjourn the meeting on the ground of absence of quorum, however, though the other members present endeavoured to pacify the plaintiff at that point of time, the plaintiff exceeded his limits uttering filthy