Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.
C/M Kranti Vidya Mandir - Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and ors. - Respondents
WRIT C NO. 16057 OF 2021.
Decided On : 11-04-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court composition and representation of parties. (Para 1) |
| 2. objection raised regarding the non-joinder of necessary parties. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. dismissal of petition due to non-joinder of necessary parties. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
Karunesh Singh Pawar, J.
Heard Ms. Bulbul Godiyal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri. Ram Raj Ojha, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional CSC for respondent no. 1 to 3 as well as Shri. M.B. Singh, learned counsel for respondent no. 4.
2. A preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the petition has been raised by learned counsel for respondent no. 4 submitting that the impugned order has been passed at the instance of 71 members of the society who have filed the reference, copy of which is on record, however, out of 71 members, only one person has been impleaded as private respondent i.e. respondent no. 4 and the others have not been impleaded, hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of the necessary parties.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute this fact that other seventy members have not been impleaded, although it has been submitted that respondent no. 4 is the main contesting respondent which has been denied by the learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4.
4. In view of the disputed facts that other seventy persons who moved the reference before the SDM under Section 25 (1) of the Society Registration Act, 1860 and at their instance, the impugned order has been passed appear to be the affected parties and they have not been impleaded by the petitioner, hence, the petition is dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties.
Point of Law : It will not be open for plaintiffs to contend that no decree in counter-claim be passed in absence of subsequent purchasers - Therefore, non-impleading the subsequent purchasers as def....
Membership in cooperative societies requires compliance with specified contributions and procedures; lacking compliance, tenant status does not automatically confer membership rights.
Flat owners have a statutory right to membership in the society under the Apartment Act, and the Deputy Registrar has the authority to enforce this right.
The court ruled that the failure of a society to produce necessary records should not disadvantage members claiming valid induction, emphasizing the importance of proper documentation in membership d....
The Assistant Registrar lacked jurisdiction to review prior decisions regarding membership induction, and the failure to notify affected members violated natural justice principles.
The court clarified that society bylaws do not restrict the timing of membership applications or require personal bank draft preparation.
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
