P VISWANATHAM Vs. BANGALORE CLUB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the appellant Sri K. S. Hanumantha rao and Sri Mohandas N. Hegde, learned Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) THE only question that arises in this case is whether the Trial court was justified in dismissing the plaintiffs suit for declaration that his removal from defendant's club is illegal simply on the ground that suit is badly framed on account of non-joinder of members of the club and whether the Court should have entered into merits of the case in absence of necessary parties or the Court should have decided the issue whether the necessary party had not been impleaded and if so its effect and should have directed the plaintiff or given time to the plaintiff to implead the parties which in view of the Trial Court have been necessary parties and thereafter should have decided the case on merits or thereafter should have dismissed the case on the ground that necessary parties not being impleaded and no relief can be granted.

(3.) THE facts of the case in brief are, that plaintiff had prayed for a decree for declaration that his removal from the membership of the defendant Club is illegal and to declare that the letter of the defendant dated 26-5-1990 bearing No. REF : BC : ACC : 2039 is void and without effect and for permanent injunction against the defendant and its officers, servants, etc. , restraining them from preventing the plaintiff from making use of the Club of the defendant as a permanent member of the club and making use of all the facilities available as a member of the club. Plaintiffs case is as per Rule VI (g)10, a member of the Club should pay the bills regularly and if the bill is not paid within 45 days, the member automatically loses the credits available and thereafter a notice would be sent calling upon him to make payments within 15 days failing which he shall be posted as defaulter and the Committee has been conferred with discretionary powers to remove the member from the Club. On 15-1-1990 plaintiff was issued with a reminder to pay dues for the month of November 1989 on or before 27-1-1990. Thereafter another bill was sent or 9-2-1990 claiming payment of arrears of Rs. 925/- for the month of January 1990. The said bill included arrears for the previous month amounting to Rs. 825/- and it was stipulated that the amount is to be paid on 28-2-1990 and further time for payment with delayed payment charges was given till 3-3-1990. Thereafter, defendant sent another letter dated /-3-1990 asking the plaintiff to pay the bills of arrears to avoid automatic stoppage of credit and subsequently on 7-3-1990 the defendant-Club sent another bill for Rs. 1,021/- for the period of february 1990 which included the past arrears. The latest bill issued on 7-3-1990 had given time till 3-4-1990 for making payment with delayed charges. Plaintiffs case is that he had paid the entire amount of dues of rs. 1,050/- on 13-3-1990 with delayed charges and has obtained receipt and at plaintiffs request, defendant issued a renewed affiliation card on 7-5-1990 which is valid for a period of three months from 7-5-1990 to 6-8-1990. Plaintiffs case is that issuance of affiliation card conclusively establishes the fact that the plaintiff continued to be a permanent member of the defendant-Club. Plaintiff asserted that he was not given the bill relating to March 1990 and on his enquiry he was informed on 16-5-1990 that, he has been removed from the membership for non-payment of Club dues. Plaintiff asserts that the removal order passed against the plaintiff by the Club was illegal as he has already paid off the amounts as stipulated in the bills issued to him.