$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 17^th March, 2025 + W.P.(C) 5279/2024, CM APPLs. 21586/2024 & 7219/2025 AJAY CHAUHAN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Archit Upadhaya, Mr. Aneesh Mittal and Ms. Sonia Abral, Advs.

versus CHINAR CO-OPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Leena Tuteja, Adv. with Mr.

Parveen Wadhwa, President and Mr.

Jatin Mittal, Secretary of Society.

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA Prathiba M. Singh, J.(ORAL)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking inter alia to set-aside the auction proceedings invoked by the Respondent No.1 for selling the flat belonging to the Petitioner.

3. The present petition reveals the 24-years struggle of the Petitioner’s family in obtaining the possession of a flat in Chinar Co-Operative Group Housing Society Ltd. (Majestic Apartments), Dwarka, New Delhi. The mother of the Petitioner (`allottee’) had applied for membership of the said Society upon clearly stating that she was a resident of Panchkula. She was W.P.(C) 5279/2024 Page 1 of 13 Signature Not Verified Signed By:DHIRENDER allotted a share certificate of Rs.100/- by the Society, on 16^th February, 2002. According to the Petitioner, the allottee had paid an amount of Rs.13,75,264/-, details of which are as under:

4. It is the case of the Petitioner that this amount constitutes 100% of the initial cost of the flat and a substantial portion of the revised cost of the flat, which is to the tune of Rs.20,23,007/-. The revised cost of the said flat is as under:

W.P.(C) 5279/2024 Page 2 of 13 Signature Not Verified Signed By:DHIRENDER

5. It is the case of the Petitioner that the allottee i.e. his mother received two show cause notices, initially on 21^st February, 2005 and 9^th March, 2005. These were replied to by the allottee and the communication ensued between the parties. The allottee then complained to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies in respect of the conduct of the Society on 31^st May, 2011 that the flat was not being allotted to her in Majestic Apartments.

W.P.(C) 5279/2024 Page 3 of 13 Signature Not Verified Signed By:DHIRENDER

6. The allottee then received the show cause notice dated 20^th June, 2011 for initiation of expulsion proceedings against her, from membership of the Society. A fresh exercise was started again by the Society for expulsion on the ground that she fraudulently obtained the membership of the Society despite not being a resident of Delhi. The said show cause notice dated 20^th June, 2011 was replied to by the allottee.

7. Again, a second show cause notice was issued on 26^th July, 2011, which was also replied to by the allottee. On 26^th September, 2011, the third and final show cause notice was issued, which was also replied to by the allottee. The allottee was then given personal hearing in the expulsion proceedings and after hearing the parties, the order dated 19^th October, 2012 was passed by Office of Registrar of Cooperative Societies. The conclusion in the said order was that the proceedings for expulsion were not maintainable as the allottee had not misled the Society in any manner. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:

“I have gone through the Application Form dated 15.12.2001 submitted by the Respondent with the Society for acquiring membership in the Society. While the permanent address of the member is mentioned as “H.No.440, Sector-6, Panchkula, Haryana”, the present address is stated to be "F-2, Sector-14, Chandigarh". The main point for consideration in this case is as to whether the cooperative society has been deceived by the member by virtue of any false statement or submitting any false documents. During arguments on 9.10.2012, this question was posed to Shri S.K. Pathak, Ld. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner Society that when the member had clearly stated on the Application F