SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 66020

MADRAS HIGH COURT
Honourable Mr Justice P. VELMURUGAN
The Secretary, Inline and Quad Roller Sports Association
A/3645/2021



A.No.3645 of 2021 in

CS.No.203 of 2021

A.No.3645 of 2021 in

CS.No.203 of 2021

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

This application has been filed by the applicants seeking

permission of this Court to implead themselves as defendants 2 to 18 in the

suit.

2. The Tamil Nadu Roller Skating Association is the plaintiff,

Roller Skating Federation of India is the defendant and the applicants herein

are the District Associations. The first respondent/plaintiff has filed the suit

in CS.No.203 of 2021 for (a) declaration that the defendant is not entitled

or empowered to call for elections to the Plaintiff Society which is an

independent Society registered under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu

Societies Registration Act, 1975, (b) permanent injunction restraining the

defendant from conducting any election of the Plaintiff Society in pursuance

of their election notification dated 04.06.2021 issued by the Defendant as

the same is non-est, illegal and not binding on the plaintiff and (c) for a

permanent injunction restraining the Defendant from interfering in the

internal administration of the Plaintiff society.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.3645 of 2021 in

CS.No.203 of 2021

3. During the pendency of the suit, all other district associations

have jointly filed this application to implead themselves as defendants 2 to

18 in the suit.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants/proposed defendants 2 to 18

would submit that the applicants/proposed defendants 2 to 18 are the

District Associations and the Plaintiff Association is only meant for all the

District Associations. Therefore, they are the necessary party to the suit.

5. Learned counsel for the first respondent/Plaintiff would submit

that the applicants/proposed defendants 2 to 18 are neither necessary nor

proper party as they have also made their allegations against the Plaintiff

Association before the Registrar of Societies. Therefore, their presence is

not necessary in the suit and without their presence, the court can adjudicate

the suit effectively.

6. Learned counsel for the second respondent/sole defendant has

no serious objection for impleading the applicants/defendants 2 to 18 in the

suit.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.3645 of 2021 in

CS.No.203 of 2021

7. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused

the materials available on record.

8. Admittedly, the first respondent/Plaintiff is the State Association

and the applicants/proposed defendants 2 to 18 are the District Associations.

The rights and interest of the applicants/proposed defendants 2 to 18 have

also been involved in this suit as they are the members of the first

respondent/plaintiff Association. Therefore, they are the necessary party to

the suit filed by the plaintiff and there is absolute necessary for the presence

of the applicants/proposed defendants 2 to 18 to decide the suit as no

effective decision has been arrived by this Court, without their presence.

Therefore, the presence of the applicants/proposed defendants 2 to 18 is

necessary for arriving at a just conclusion. This Court feels that this

application has to be allowed. According A.No.3645 of 2021 is allowed and

the learned counsel for the plaintiff is directed to carry out the amendment

and file the amended copy of the plaint before 13.04.2022.

9. Post the matter on 13.04.2022.

18.03.2022

nl

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.No.3645 of 2021 in

CS.No.203 of 2021

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

nl

A.No.3645 of 2021 in

CS.No.203 of 2021

18.03.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top