Sangam Ss. Velaichamynadar Kalloori & Ors Vs. District Registrar & Ors
 INSC 401 (7 April 1997)
RAMASWAMY, D.P. WADHWA
O R D
E R Leave granted.
appeals by special leave arise from the judgment of the Division Bench of the
Madras High Court, made on January 9, 1997
in CMA No. 843/96 and WP Nos. 9771 and 12007/96.
N.M.S.S Vellaichamy Nadar College was established by Nadar Mahajan Sangam in the year 1965
and election to the Society which runs the college, is the bone of the
contention. Untrammeled by procedural formats and its ramifications in the
process of election, the heart of the matter is good management of the college.
Who is entitled to run the institution the college. Who is entitled to run the
institution and administer property of the said institution is the crux of the
question. It is not in dispute that though the term of the previous Society
Committee expired on March
31, 1966, elections
could not be held for one reason or the other. As a consequence, at the pain of
the entrustment of the management to the third agency, elections came to be
held on June 9, 1996, which proved to be an abortive
attempt. Consequent thereon, a complaint was made to the Registrar in Form No.7
on June 12, 1996. An enquiry appears to have been
held by the Registrar which failed in the process from legal perspectives but
the report was submitted on June 19, 1996.
In the meanwhile, OS No. 417/96 was filed for perpetual injunction. An interim
mandatory injunction was issued in I.A. No.292/96 directing the District
Registrar appointed under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 (for
short, the `Act') to find out factual position and then to submit the report.
In the meanwhile, writ petitions came to be filed. Ultimately, the Division
Bench came to the conclusion that the learned trial Judge had abdicated his
functioning as an adjudicatory authority; he should have recorded the evidence
and the findings by himself. Instead, he directed the Registrar to conduct an
enquiry and, thereby, it is a case of abdication of judicial functioning.
Accordingly, the impugned order was passed.
have heard learned counsel for both the parties.
view to shorten the litigation, the appropriate course would be as under:
civil Court is directed to appoint an Advocate as a Commissioner. The
Advocate-Commissioner would take all the members of the Society existing as on May 14, 1996 as valid members. He should conduct
the elections afresh in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the
bye-laws of the Society. Till the elections are held, the Principal shall
continue to hold charge of the management of the institution and will act as
Receiver of the Court under Order XL, Rule 1, CPC. He shall be answerable to
receipt of the report from the Advocate-Commissioner, the civil Court shall
pass appropriate orders in the light of the report thus submitted and dispose
of the suit accordingly. The expenditure incurred and fees of the
Advocate-Commissioner should be as determined by the civil Court. Elections are
directed to be conducted within a period of six weeks from the date of the
appointment of the Advocate-Commissioner by the trial Court. The trial Court is
directed to appoint the Commissioner within two weeks from the date of the
receipt of the order. The trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit, after
the election report is submitted, within three months thereafter. The fee of
the Advocate-Commissioner should be determined by the trial Court. The same
shall be born by the successful party.
the same may be paid by the Principal from the College funds and later
recovered by the College from the successful party to the suit.
appeals are accordingly disposed of. No costs.
Pages: 1 2