Suits for declaration of society membership and injunctions are not maintainable without challenging removal resolutions or dissolution, with concurrent factual findings on due process non-interfereable in second appeal.

JUDGMENT :

P.B. BALAJI, J.

1.The plaintiffs in O.S.No.973 of 1990 before the District Munsif Court, Trichy, aggrieved by the concurrent findings rendered by the trial Court as well as the first appellate Court, are the appellants in S.A. (MD)No.371 of 2024.

2. The plaintiffs in O.S.No.976 of 1990 before the District Munsif Court, Trichy, aggrieved by the concurrent findings rendered by the trial Court as well as the first appellate Court, are the appellants in S.A. (MD)No.715 of 2024.

3. Considering the fact that the appeals are arising out of common cause, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the appeals had been heard together.

4. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rank before the trial Court.

5. I have heard Mr.J.Arumainayagam, learned counsel for the appellants in both the appeals and Mr.V.Meenakshi Sundaram, for Mr.S.Vinod Sathya Lazar, learned counsel for the contesting respondents in both the appeals, viz., respondents 1 to 4 in SA(MD)No.371 of 2024 and respondents 1, 12 and 13 in SA(MD)No.715 of 2024 and Mr.J.Madhu, learned counsel for the second respondent in both the appeals.

6. The Second Appeals were admitted on 07.04.2026 on the following substantial question of law:

“ Whether the resolution of the Sangam, passed in the absence of a special resolution, is valid under Section 41 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975?”

7. Brief facts that are necessary for deciding the second appeals are as hereunder:

O.S.No.973 of 1990 came to be filed by as many as 28 plaintiffs, claiming to be members of a registered Society, viz.,St. John Sangam, having its Head Quarters at Perambalur. The plaintiffs sought for a relief of declaration that the plaintiffs are members of the said Society /Sangam and for consequential injunction to restrain the defendants from preventing the plaintiffs from functioning as members of the said Sangam.

8. O.S.No.976 of 1990 was originally filed by some of the plaintiffs originally before the District Munsif Court at Perambalur, in O.S.No.817 of 1989. The plaintiffs therein sought for relief of declaration that the defendants 8 to 19 in the said suit are not members of said St. John Sangam, and for consequential injunction to restrain the defendants from acting as members of the said Sangam and also for a similar declaration regarding defendants 1 to 7 as well, however, restricting it to the managing committee of St. John Sangam.

9. The suits were resisted by the defendants, contending that though the plaintiffs 1 to 18 had been originally initiated as members in the Society, but subsequently, they have been removed in terms of resolution passed by the Sangam. Insofar as the plaintiffs 19 to 28, the defendants contended that these plaintiffs were never members of the Sangam at any point of time.

10. With regard to O.S.No.976 of 1990 (O.S.No.817 of 1989), the defendants resisted the suit reliefs contending that admittedly the plaintiffs are members of the Sangam. However, the plaintiffs have colluded with the plaintiffs in O.S.No.973 of 1990 and hence, the plaintiffs have lost their membership from their Sangam and they are not members as on the date of filing of the suit. The allegation regarding misappropriation of funds and other unlawful activities have been stoutly denied by the defendants. The suit was transferred to the file of the Principal District Munsif, Tiruchirappalli