BANGLORE GOLF CLUB Vs. M R DORAISWAMY IYENGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal, Bangalore Golf Club calls in question the justification of the trial Court staying the, order of suspension pending enquiry, issued by the appellant- club.

(2.) BRIEFLY staled, respondent-plaintiff being a member of appellant-club, was issued with a show-cause notice dated 23/2/2010 in which it was stated that the membership of the respondent had stood suspended with immediate effect for a period of three months or till the committee takes appropriate decision with regard to charge of misconduct levelled against reapondent-plaintiff in the show cause notice issued on 15/12/2009 to him. This order of suspension formed the basis for the respondent's suit for declaration/that the said order of suspension is ultra vires, illegal, and unenforceable and show cause notice issued to him on 15/12/2009 was also null and void and for other reliefs. I.A.No. 1 was filled during the pendency of the said suit for an order of temporary injunction seeking staying of the operation of the suspension order dated 23.2.2010. After hearing both sides, the trial Court by its impugned order allowed the said LA. and stayed the operation of the order of suspension, thereby driving the Golf Club to approach this Court in this appeal.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned Sr. Counsel Shri Ravi B. Naik for the respondent-plaintiff referring to Rule 10.3.1 contended that said rule provides that members are entitled to all the rights of using the club, participation in joint meeting, management of the club, etc., and therefore, the request made by the respondent through various letters to the club seeking certain information only goes to show that the respondent has got a right to have a say in the management of the club and the management does not mean mismanagement. As the club is intending to put up a new club house, the respondent sought certain information and according to the respondent, without obtaining any sanction from the concerned authorities, the club has gone on to take steps like issuing tender notification, etc., and therefore, being a member of the club for over three decades, the respondent is very much interested in seeing that there is no mismanagement in the functioning of the club. Under these circumstances, mere asking for certain information from the officials cannot be a serious misconduct so as to get suspension from a membership of the club. The period of three months is already over and the allegations made against the respondent as could be seen from the show cause notice also have no basis because the respondent had stopped playing golf at the club about two years back and as such, committing certain misconduct and involving caddies does not arise. In support of all the above submissions, learned Sr. Counsel also placed reliance on the decisions reported in 2004 (4) SCC 697 : (AIR 2004 SC 1975) and (1991) 2 SCC (Supp) 36. Therefore, it is contended that when the show cause notice is bereft of particulars of the misconduct committed, the order of suspension cannot be maintained in law. Under these circumstances, the trial Court was justified in staying the operation of the suspension order.