MAVUJI Vs. ALLEPPY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition for a writ of certiorari under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India read along with Art. 238. The 1st counter-petitioner in this case is the Alleppey Chamber of Commerce, a Company incorporated under the Travancore Companies Act. It has got a Produce section which was started in 1947. Ext. I is the Bye-laws, Rules and Regulations of the produce Section of the Company. The main objects of the Produce Section are "to promote, support, and protect the character, status and interests of the merchants in general and those engaged in Produce Trade in particular, to define the customs and usages of such trade, to make rules and regulations conducive to just and honourable practices therein, to consider all questions affecting the interests of Produce Trade, to adjust controversies, to arbitrate upon and settle disputes of all kinds, to appoint arbitrators and umpires and experts to make awards and decisions, and generally to encourage and stimulate fair and honourable trading, to collect, print, publish and circulate statistics and other information relating to the Produce Trade and to do all such things necessary or conducive to the promotion of Produce Trade". The business of the Produce Section is managed by a committee including the president of the Alleppey Chamber of Commerce who shall always be the President of the Produce Section. The other members of the Committee are elected annually at the General Meeting of the Produce Section. The Committee has got an honorary Secretary and Treasurer. The 2nd counter petitioner is the present honorary Secretary. The other counter petitioners are members of the Committee. There are at present 149 members in the Produce Section. The petitioners who are five in number are members of the produce Section.

(2.) THE normal business of the Produce Section is the carrying on of forward transactions in respect of cocoanut oil and pepper. THE manner in which such forward transactions are effected in respect of cocoanut oil is the following: Each member of the Produce Section who desires to participate in such transaction has to deposit a sum of Rs. 25/- per candy of oil which he wishes to sell or buy. This is called coupon deposit. No member can transact business without making the necessary coupon deposit and cannot transact any business in excess of the limit of the coupons possessed by him. Contracts for sale or purchase are entered into for a period known as "vaida" which starts on the 1st of the month and ends on the 25th of the succeeding month. Normally there is a clearance after close of business every Friday when the Committee will fix the clearance price. THE committee has power to fix any special clearance price on any day in the week other than the usual weekly clearance day if circumstances warrant such a clearance in the interests of the trade. Accounts will be settled on the basis of the difference between the clearance price and the contract price as on the clearance days. On the last day of the Vaida also namely on the 25th clearance rate will be fixed by the Committee and delivery of oil will have to be given or taken the next day or accounts settled between the parties on the basis of the difference between the clearance price and the contract price and amounts paid or received as the case may be. THE coupon deposit is maintained as security for payment of the difference between the clearance price and the contract price.

(3.) THE petition is opposed by the counter-petitioners. THE 2nd counter-petitioner has filed an affidavit on 3. 10. 1951 denying the allegations contained in the affidavit filed along with the O. P. It is contended that the petition is an abuse of the process of Court, that it is a concerted attempt to wreck and paralyse the work of the Chamber of Commerce and that it is totally devoid of good faith. It is stated that the Secretary has been authorised by the Committee as provided in the bye-laws to exercise the powers of the Committee, that he was therefore competent to issue the notice fixing the clearance price and that it was done in good faith in the interests of the trade. It is also contended that the Committee was competent to pass the resolutions mentioned in the petition, that the fixing of the clearance rate is a matter entirely in the discretion of the Committee that the clearance price fixed by the Committee was quite fair, that they were justified in closing the market on 25. 9. 1951, that the Committee acted in the best interests of the members of the trade and that there are no grounds for interfering with this exercise of discretion by the Committee. It is also stated that petitioners nos. 1 to 4 and some others filed a suit on 25. 9. 1951 in the District Munsiff's court of Alleppey for a declaration that the acts complained of in this petition are invalid and for an injunction restraining the Company from disbursing the coupon deposits. THEse plaintiffs also applied for a temporary injunction restraining the Company from carrying on any business, and a provisional order of injunction was issued by the Additional District Munsiff on 27. 9. 1951. THE petitioners Nos. 2, 3 and 5 filed another suit in the same court on 27. 9. 1951 and moved a petition before the Principal Munsiff for a temporary injunction restraining the 1st defendant Company from operating its bank accounts. A provisional order was passed in that petition also. It was after that the present O. P. was filed in this Court on 29. 9. 1951 and an injunction was applied for. THE fact that two suits have been filed in the munsiff's Court and that applications for temporary inunction have been moved was not mentioned in the affidavit filed along with the Original Petition. It is contended that since the petitioners have already instituted suits for the reliefs claimed in this O. P. they are not entitled to move this Court for a writ of certiorari. THE 5th petitioners filed a supplementary affidavit on 3. 10. 1951 and a supplementary counter affidavit was filed by the 4th counter-petitioner on 4. 10. 1951.