LAWS(DLH)-2019-11-188

SHEELA GEHLOT Vs. REGISTRAR COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES

Decided On November 21, 2019
SHEELA GEHLOT Appellant
V/S
REGISTRAR COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition challenges an order dated 18th February, 2014 passed by the Delhi Cooperative Tribunal ("Tribunal") whereby the Appeal No. 30/2006 filed by the Petitioner against the order dated 4th July, 2006 passed by the Deputy Registrar (Arbitration) allowing the claim petition filed by the Respondent No. 2/Delhi Dayalbagh Cooperative House Building Society Limited (hereafter "Society") under Section 70 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act 2003 (DCS Act) and referring the dispute between the Society and the Petitioner to arbitration was disallowed.

(2.) The facts in brief are that a sale deed was executed by the Society on 9th December, 1968 in respect of the property No. B-21, Soami Nagar, New Delhi admeasuring 500 sq. Yds. (hereafter "property in question") in favour of Shri H. N. Vibhakar. On 22nd December, 1976, Shri H.N. Vibhakar executed a registered Will bequeathing the property in question in favour of Smt. Veena Babbar (Respondent No.4). After Shri H. N. Vibhakar expired on 30th July 1977, the property stood mutated in the name of Smt. Veena Babbar on 10th April, 1979 in the records of Municipal Corporation of Delhi. On 9th July, 1985 the District Judge, Delhi granted letter of administration in respect of the Will in favour of Smt. Veena Babbar. She got the building plan sanctioned from the Delhi Development Authority on 12th May, 1988. The Society accepted a sum of Rs.2125/- from heron account of additional compensation of the land and issued a receipt in this regard on 6th October, 1996.

(3.) As far as the Appellant is concerned, she purchased the property in question from Smt. Veena Babbar by registered sale deed on 29th April, 2005. On 9th January, 2006 the Society filed a claim under Section 70 of the DCS Act for declaration of sale/transfer of the property in question in favour of the Appellant as illegal and of no consequence. The stand of the Society was that in terms of its Bye Laws, the sale had to be either to a member of the society or to the Society itself.