DELHI CINE GOERS COUNCIL (REGISTERED) Vs. RAMESH DAWER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM 1781/2015 (Exemption)

(2.) IN the plaint it is stated that the petitioner/plaintiff is the registered society with its office at 3160/34, First Floor, Beedonpura, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. On an election being held on 1st June, 2013, a new body was elected. The respondent, who is a retired employee of United Bank of India was looking after the functioning of the petitioner society as its general secretary prior to the elections held on 1st June, 2013. According to the petitioner/plaintiff, the respondent/defendant got forged two demand drafts dated 3rd June, 2013 and 4th June, 2013 for Rs.1,35,000/ - and 4,25,765.19p in the name of "Cine Goers Council" which is not concerned with the petitioner/plaintiff. It is alleged that the respondent was misguiding the public and illegally collecting funds by inviting new members.

(3.) IN the written statement the defendant/respondent stated that he is the Secretary General of "Delhi Cine Goers Council" having its office at 3197, Lal Darwaja, Sita Ram Bazar, Delhi -110006 which has been functioning for the last 44 years in Delhi. The plaintiff and defendant?s societies are two separate and distinct societies one unregistered and formed in 1969 and the other registered in 2013. It is the case of the respondent/defendant that the petitioner society has been created mischievously and illegally with the ulterior motives of usurping the funds of the defendant?s society and to illegally take advantage and credit of all the good work and goodwill earned by the defendant society. The defendant has placed on record material showing the establishment of Delhi Cine Goers Council in 1969, their founder members as mentioned in magazine "Smarika" published in the year 1999 and events organized by them. The defendant has already written a letter to the office of SDM on 24th July, 2013 requesting for deregistering/cancellation of Delhi Cine Goers Council whereafter the plaintiff society gave a show cause notice to the respondent/defendant. The defendant has no concern with the plaintiff society or its elections.