DAULAT RAM MEHNIDRATTA Vs. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This full bench has been constituted to resolve the conflict between two division bench judgments of this court namely Prof. Balraj Madhok & Others v. Registrar of Co-operative Societies & others, I.L.R. 1974(2) Delhi 684 and S.B. Lall& another v. Registrar of Co-operative Societies New Delhi & another, l.L.R. 1977(2) Delhi 164. The question that calls for determination is to the exact impact and the effect of Rule 25(1 )(c) read with Rule 25(2) of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Rules, 1973 (hereinafter to be called as the Rules).

(2.) The petitioner applied for and became a member of Dera lsmail Khan Cooperative House Building Society in 1952. In 1954 the petitioner purchased a house at B-17/A-9, Krishan Nagar, Delhi. In 1955 the petitioner purchased 4 plots from M/s. Nirmal Finance India Private Ltd. This land along with certain other lands was acquired and a Preet Nagar Cooperative House Building Society was formed and the petitioner became a member of the said Society in 1958. The Preet Nagar Cooperative House Building Society was accepted by the Housing Commissioner, Delhi Administration for the purpose of allotment of plots on concessional basis on certainn condi- tions mentioned in the lease deed. One of the conditions laid down by the Housing Commissioner by his letter of 5.u.1966 laid down that it was proposed to allot land to the society subject to certain conditions ; one of them being.....................(ii) 'any person who already owns a house/residential flat in his own name or in the name of his wife or dependent children will not be allotted any land as a member of this society.'

(3.) It may be mentioned that at the time when the petitioner became a member of the Preet Nagar Society he was already a member of the Dera Ismail Khan Cooperative House Building Society. It also is a common case that at that time there was no restriction on a person becoming a member of more than one house building cooperative societies. The Preet Nagar Society in pursuance of the advice by the Delhi Administration adopted model bye-laws by its resolution of 4-9-1966 agreeing to comply with the condition which was a condition precedent for the allotment of land. Bye-law 5(i)(f) & (h) read as under :- (f) he is not a member of any other House Building Society. (h) He or his wife (she or her husband in case of a woman) or any of his/her dependants does not own a dwelling house or aplot for building a house in Delhi/New Delhi/Delhi Cantt. But this would not effect membership enrolled under Clause 5(1) above, who would be entitled to remain member of the Society for the purpose of getting compensation through the Society of his land having been acquired. The condition for allotment imposed by the Housing Commissioner vide letter dated 5.8.1966 was duly communicated to the members including the petitioner. By his letter of 10.11.1976, the petitioner intimated that he has understood the three conditions imposed by Delhi Administration for allotment of land. Even when the allotment was made to him on 16.8.1976 it was made clear that the allotment made is subject to the affidavit being submitted. The petitioner was thereafter asked to furnish an affidavit in compliance with the undertaking given by the Society to the Delhi Administration for the allotment of land in accordance with the conditions of membership under the New Model Bye Laws and as per undertaking of the petitioner in his letter of 10-11-1976. Thereafter the Delhi Administration leased to the Society by lease deed of 11.4.1977 the land on certain conditions mentioned therein. One of the conditions of the lease deed dated 11.4.1977 and the one relevant to the present case is clause 5(a) which reads as under: