Disputes regarding internal society management must be referred for arbitration as per society's by-laws.

C O M M O N O R D E R

These two Civil Revision Petitions are filed challenging the orders of the Court below referring the parties to go for arbitration in view of the by-

laws which provide for referring the matter for arbitration.

2.Brief background of the case is as follows :

The revision petitioner has filed two suits, one in O.S.Nos.4494 of

2023 on the file of the XV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, and another in O.S.No.1714 of 2023 on the file of the XVI Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. O.S.No.4494 of 2023 is filed challenging the order of suspension passed by the respondent Society against the petitioner, and O.S.No.1714 of

2023 is filed for the following reliefs :

(a)permanent injunction restraining the 1^st defendant from including the hereditary patron members into the executive committee of the society of 1^st defendant without the members participating in the election;

(b)to declare Clause 7(C) of the bylaws of the 1^st defendant Society automatically including the hereditary patron members into the executive committee of the 1^st defendant Society as null and void;

(c)mandatory injunction directing the 1^st defendant to furnish the entire details of the land and building A.M.Jain College being

5^th defendant, Sri Mohan Mull Chordia Jain Industrial Training Centre being 6^th defendant, the property situated at Godown Street and Sault Coutours into the books of account, income tax returns of the 1^st defendant Society.

(d)mandatory injunction directing the 1^st defendant to include new life members in the 1^st defendant society;

(e)mandatory injunction directing the 1^st defendant to conduct the executive committee meeting of the 1^st defendant society once in every three months;

(f) mandatory injunction directing the defendants 4 to 11 to transfer their respective yearly profit or income to the 1^st defendant society;

(g)permanent injunction restraining 1^st defendant from and in any challenging the names of the existing life members, hereditary members, hereditary patron members of the 1^st defendant society.

3.The revision petitioner is a member of the respondent Society.

According to the petitioner, there was mismanagement of the assets of the Society by the newly elected office bearers. It is his contention that, to set right the same, the executive committee meeting has not been conducted as per the by-laws of the Society. Further, when mischiefs were pointed out, an Annual General Meeting was conducted on 23.03.2023, wherein, it was unanimously recommended to suspend the petitioner. Challenging the suspension, the suit in O.S.No.4494 of 2023 has been filed. Similarly, the other suit in O.S.No.1714 of 2023 is also filed alleging mismanagement in the society and for the aforesaid reliefs. The pleadings in both the suits is primarily with regard to the meeting conducted by the society and the resolution passed suspending the revision petitioner.

4.Pending the suits, the respondent has filed the present applications under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996, to refer the matter for arbitration. The trial Court, taking note of the specific clauses in the by-laws governing the society, namely, By-laws 68(a) and 68(b), allowed the applications. Challenging the order allowing the applications, the revision petitions are filed.

5.Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would mainly contend that the suits have been filed with regard to the mismanagement of the assets of the society and that the Civil Court alone has got jurisdiction to go into the issues, whereas, the Arbitrators cannot go into those issues, however, the trial Court has not considered this aspect. Therefore, the learned counsel prayed for setting aside the impugned orde