I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL THE HON’BLE CHI EF JUSTI CE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTI CE SHRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY Special Appeal No.478 of 2019 February 24, 2026 Moti Ram Saklani ---Appellant Versus The “Good Shepherd” Agriculture Mission & Others ---Respondents --------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Mr. T.A. Khan, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Mohd. Shafy, learned counsel for the appellant Mr. J.C. Pande, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand --------------------------------------------------------------

JUDGMENT : (per Mr. Manoj Kumar Gupta C. J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present intra-court appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 15.05.2014 passed in WPMS No.2192 of 2011, whereby the writ petition filed by non-appellant no.1 herein challenging the order dated 16.06.2011 passed by the Prescribed Authority u/s 25 of the Societies Registration Act, declaring election of Committee of Management dated 10.12.2007 to be illegal with further direction that the office bearers of the year 2003-04 would continue as valid members and the agreement to sell was held to be in violation of Section 5-A of the Societies Registration Act, was disposed of observing that the proceedings u/s 25 of the Societies Registration Act were of summary nature and the findings recorded therein does not operate as res judicata in case a regular civil suit is filed. 3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant was in fact the real Secretary of the Society and has accordingly filed the present appeal along with an application for leave to appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the President of the Society had challenged the same order by filing SPA No.287/2014 and the same was dismissed on 07.03.2022.

5. The dispute in the writ petition related to the elections held on 10.12.2007. The learned Single Judge has only observed that the orders passed u/s 25 of the Societies Registration Act do not operate as res judicata in a regular civil suit; the proceedings u/s 25 of Societies Registration Act being of a summary nature. No finding has been returned by learned Single Judge on merits of the dispute.

6. The present appeal was filed in the year 2019 and since then defects have not been removed.

7. In our considered opinion, nothing further survives for consideration in the instant appeal as the dispute pertains to the election held in the year 2007. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous, with liberty to the appellant to avail such remedy as may be available to him under the law.

8. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly.

(MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C. J.)

(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.)

Dated: 24.02.2026

Rajni