SHARADBHAI PREMAJI RAMI Vs. VISHNUBHAI NATVARLAL PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner (original opponent No.2 in Revision Application No.179/2012) has challenged the order dated 11th January, 2013 passed by the Gujarat Co-operative Tribunal in Revision Application No.179/2012.

(2.) THE facts of the case as appearing from the record are that there was a common plot owned by the respondent No.7 ­ Patidar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Panchvati, being Plot No.8, Final Plot No.621, T.P. Scheme No.3, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the 'subject plot') which was leased out by the society in the year 1969 to one Darshan Decorators for commercial use with the consent of all its members. It appears that thereafter the society decided to give membership in respect of the subject plot. One Jamnaben Annaji and the petitioner ­ Sharadbhai Premji Rami made an application dated 1 st September, 1985 and offered Rs.10 lakhs towards the subject plot. The said application was submitted to the Managing Committee on 5th September, 1985 which came to be accepted and the subject plot came to be allotted to them and share certificate also came to be issued.

(3.) IT appears that on 17th September, 2005, the respondent No.7 society passed a resolution, inter alia, permitting commercial use of the plots of the society. The said resolution came to be challenged by the respondent No.6 ­ Balmukund Atmaram Patel and six other members before the Board of Nominees in Lavad Suit No.1154/2005. The said suit was filed in September, 2005. In the said proceedings, an application Exhibit-6 was filed by the plaintiffs therein praying for interim injunction. It appears that the said suit was strongly contested by the respondent No.7 society. By an order dated 22nd June, 2006, the Board of Nominees, Ahmedabad granted permanent injunction, restraining the defendants therein from carrying on any commercial activity till the final disposal of the suit. The petitioner herein was impleaded as defendant No.9 in the said suit.