INDU Vs. MODEST KETKI CGHS LTD & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule DB. With the consent of the parties all the five writ petitions are set down for final hearing and disposal.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the basis facts in all the matters are identical and all the petitioners claim to be Founder Members of respondent No.1 Group Housing Society (hereinafter referred to as "Society"). According to the petitioners, all the Members of the Society have been allotted flats barring the five petitioners.

(3.) The petitioners received a communication dated 22.01.1998 from Registrar of Societies (hereinafter referred to as "Registrar") informing the petitioners that the Registrar had received an intimation about acceptance of their resignation by the Managing Committee of the Society on 05.02.1996. Petitioners were required to confirm as to whether they had resigned or not. The petitioners on different dates informed the Registrar that they had not resigned from the membership 02.02.1998 in W. P. (C) 6349/2013. The petitioners received a letter dated 14.06.2010 from the Registrar calling upon them while giving reference of Page 4 of 6 their replies that they may take recourse to Section 17 of Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as "Act") by invoking Arbitration Clause. The statement of claim filed was rejected by the Joint Registrar, who was appointed as an Arbitrator by an order dated 21.10.2010 on the grounds of limitation. The appeal filed before the Tribunal was dismissed on 05.09.2013 also on the ground that claim was beyond limitation. The relevant part of the said order reads as under: