Back
2024 Supreme(Mad) 2712
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V. Lakshminarayanan, J.
S. Sridharan - Petitioner
Versus
Joshua Treasurer - Respondent
CRP No.4957 of 2024 and CMP No.27910 of 2024
Decided On : 13-12-2024
For the Petitioner: Mr.S.Venugopalraj
A registered society can sue via an authorized officer, and failure to present bye-laws is non-fatal as mis-description can be amended during trial.
Headnote:(A) Societies Registration Act, 1975 - Section 20 - Suit for recovery of dues - Plaintiff filed suit as treasurer of a registered society without producing bye-laws - Court finds no law mandates bye-law submission; mis-description of a party is non-fatal - Common amenities utilized justify claims against residents - Court affirmed lower court decision. (Paras 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, and 15)
(B) Jurisdiction of the Court - The Hon'ble Court held that the proper authority can file suit for a registered society and courts may allow amendments to cause-title as necessary. (Paras 9 and 12)
Facts of the case:
The plaintiff, as the treasurer of a society, sought dues from the defendant for unpaid maintenance charges for a flat, which was substantiated by the plaintiff’s role and the existence of a cause of action due to non-payment.
Findings of Court:
The learned trial Judge concluded that the suit is maintainable as it was presented in the official capacity, confirming that the association has rights to sue for dues.
Issues: The primary issues included the authority of the plaintiff to file the suit and adherence to procedural requirements.
Ratio Decidendi: The court clarified that under the applicable legislation, suits can be presented by any officer authorized by the society, and non-compliance with the bye-laws is rectifiable, emphasizing the need for clarity over jurisdictional issues related to society registrations.
Result: Civil revision petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition arises from a suit for maintenance charges. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defendant's argument on plaintiff's capacity to sue. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. trial judge dismissed defendant's application. (Para 5) |
| 4. legal provisions applicable to registered societies. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. mis-description in parties does not invalidate the suit. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. prior unregistered society judgment is not applicable. (Para 12) |
| 7. court confirms trial judge's order. (Para 13) |
| 8. intertwined suits are consolidated for trial. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 9. court dismisses civil revision petition. (Para 16) |
ORDER :
V. Lakshminarayanan, J.
This civil revision petition arises against the order passed by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge at Coimbatore in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in O.S.No.594 of 2022 dated 02.07.2024. The civil revision petitioner is the defendant in the suit.
2. O.S.No.594 of 2022 is a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.5,50,560/- together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. The case of the plaintiff is that the defendant is an occupant of the Flat bearing No.307 in the apartment complex under the name and style "The Retreat by Mint Homes". As per the resolution passed by the General Body, the annual maintenance for the flat occupied by the defendant was fixed at Rs.75,000/- for the year 2019-20. It had to be paid on or before 01.10.2019. The plaintiff alleged that despite the fact that the common amenities and other facilities like common lightings, common fittings, lift, water, power backup generators, sewage treatment, garbage picking by Corporation, park, play grounds, were being enjoyed by the defendant, he failed to pay the dues from 2014 onwards. The plaint proceeds, despite several requests made by the plaintiff to the defendant, the defendant did not show any response. Being left with no other alternative, the plaintiff came forth with the suit.
3. On being served with the summons, the defendant took out an application for rejection of plaint. He pleaded that the plaintiff has sued in his personal capacity and has not produced the bye-laws of the association, in order to demonstrate before the Court that, the treasurer of the association is entitled to file the suit. He further alleged that the plaint has not been filed by the association nor by the President, but by an individual and hence, the suit is not maintainable and it is liable to be rejected.
4. A counter was presented by the plaintiff. In the said counter, it was asserted that the suit has not been presented in his personal capacity, but as the treasurer of the association. He stated that as treasurer, he has every right to institute the legal proceedings. He pointed out that as per the Memorandum of Association and its bye-laws dated 07.10.2008, it is the treasurer of the association, who is having all rights, to act on behalf of the association. Finally, he pleaded that the suit is filed as the treasurer in the official capacity and since the dues have not been paid to the association, there also exists a cause of action for continuance of the suit.
5. The learned trial Judge came to a conclusion that the suit has been presented only in the official capacity and that the plaintiff always has the time to produce the bye-laws during the course of trial. Consequently, he dismissed the application. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the defendant is on revision before me.
6. I heard Mr.Venugopalraj in support of the revision.
7. Mr.Venugopalraj placing reliance upon Section 6 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, urges that as per the proviso, every society registered may sue or be sued only by the President, Chairman, Principal Secretary or the Trustees as determined by the rules and regulations of the society. Since the bye-laws have not been produced by the plaintiff, he is not entitled to proceed further with the suit. He relies upon a judgment of the Supreme Court in P.Nazeer vs. Salafi Trust and Another , Civil Appeal Nos.3132- 3133 of 2016 dated 30.03.2022 to urge
