VINODBHAI JAGJIVAN PATADIYA Vs. NARAYANBHAI JAGJIVAN PATADIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner and respondent No. 1 herein are real brothers. One deceased Prabhavatiben J. Patadiya, mother of both the petitioner and respondent No. 1, was a member of respondent No. 2-Society since 1963. Late Smt. Prabhavatiben nominated the petitioner herein as her nominee in relation to plot No. 32 in Vibhag No. 1 i. e. property held by deceased Prabhavatiben. She expired on 4. 9. 1979. According to the petitioner vide applications dated 24. 3. 1981 and 25. 3. 1981 the petitioner called upon respondent No. 2- Society to enter his name in records but, despite the fact that the nomination was registered with respondent No. 2-Society, the application for entering the name of the petitioner in the records of the Society vice deceased Prabhavatiben was not accepted by respondent No. 2-Society. Subsequently notice dated 6. 7. 1981 through an Advocate came to be served by the petitioner. On 22. 11. 1981 respondent No. 2-Society informed the petitioner that the nomination of petitioner was cancelled and name of respondent No. 1 as member was to be inserted in the records of respondent No. 2-Society as per resolution dated 3. 5. 1981.

(2.) THE petitioner therefore approached the Board of Nominees vide Lavad Case No. 4 of 1982 seeking declaration that resolution dated 3. 5. 1981 of respondent No. 2-Society was illegal and without jurisdiction and also for inserting the name of the petitioner, being the nominee. After hearing the parties the Board of Nominees allowed the Lavad Suit vide judgment and award dated 13. 8. 1993.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 1 preferred Restoration Application No. 176 of 1993 on 28. 9. 1993. The said application was rejected by Board of Nominees by a reasoned order dated 6. 12. 1994. It appears that thereafter various proceedings took place before the Tribunal and this Court by way of challenge by respondent No. 1 qua order dated 6. 12. 1994 passed by the Board of Nominees. Suffice it to state that after a chequered litigation ultimately the Appeal before the Tribunal stood revived.