The general body lacks authority to expel members without adhering to bye-laws and natural justice principles.

JUDGMENT

The plaintiffs in O.S. No.272 of 2010 on the files of the Munsiff Court, North Paravur filed for a declaration and for damages are the appellants herein.

2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the appeal are as follows: The 1^st defendant is an institution functioning at Valiyapallamthuruth since 1966, and the plaintiffs are its permanent members. The 1^st defendant/institution has around 300 members and its aim is to give financial assistance in connection with the occurrence of death in the family of its members and other social benefits. The deposit scheme, Chitty and other projects are its income. There is a written by-law, and altogether forty two (42) general body meetings were conducted. Its financial year is 1^st April to 31^st March and the statement of accounts, audit reports, and budget will be discussed in the annual general body meeting. In the 41^st annual general body meeting held on 31.8.2008 presided over by one P.S. Sajeevan, the plaintiffs were elected as its President and vice president respectively. Sri. Sajeevan was not ready to hand over the charge to the new committee. Due to the compulsion of the new committee members, the charge was handed over and they took charge on 13.9.2008. During the tenure of the administration of the defendants, they convened 19 meetings and 144 decisions were taken and implemented. Due to the financial stringency, the plaintiffs shortened the expenditure and did the administration as per the bye laws. During the 42^nd annual general body meeting on 13.9.2009 a notice was published in which one Kacherippokkath Madhu’s name was included in the list of defaulters of loan. The said person filed a complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, North Paravur. One Santhosh who was the clerk of the 1^st defendant had misappropriated the money and fabricated the statement of accounts and thereafter it was found that the said Santhosh again executed an agreement on 15.4.2003 thereby acknowledging the liability and agreeing to pay the amount. Due to various reasons, there occurred a scuffle in the 42^nd general body meeting on 13.9.2009 and since the meeting ended in turmoil, the plaintiffs resigned. But, certain members who have been present constituted an enquiry commission and conducted an enquiry without inspecting the necessary documents. Later, on the basis of the report, a general body meeting was held on 27.9.2009 wherein the plaintiffs were disqualified for a period of twelve (12) years. The decision, according to the plaintiffs, was unlawful and irregular. Later, the plaint was amended by order dated 7.4.2013 in I.A No.411 of 2012 wherein the decision of the 44^th annual general body meeting held on 27.11.2011 was also questioned. In the said meeting, it was decided that the plaintiffs would be expelled from the primary membership of the 1^st defendant for a period of fifteen (15) years. The defendant entered appearance and contested the suit and contended that it is for the general body to take a final decision as regards the continuance of the plaintiffs. It was further contended that there were serious allegations against the appellants and therefore they were removed from the primary membership. The decision of the general body was pursuant to a valid procedure and therefore there is no violation of any of the rules of the bye-laws. On behalf of the plaintiffs Exts.A1 to A16 were marked and Exts.B1 to B26 were marked on the side of the defendants. PW1 to PW3 were examined on behalf of the plaintiff and DW1 and DW2 were examined on behalf of the defenda