P VENUGOPAL Vs. MUSIC ACADEMY MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF is the member of the Music Academy which is a society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act.

(2.) THE plaintiff has filed the suit (i) for declaring that the bye-laws 12 (e), 19, 26, 35 and 36 of the defendants-Society are void as they are contrary to the Act and Rules; for mandatory injunction to bring the buy-laws of the Society in consonance with the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975; (ii) for a declaration that the constitution of Board of Trustees consisting of 7 members who are nominated by the Executive Committee for six years is void, as they are contrary to the Act; (iii) for mandatory injunction to constitute the Board of Trustees from among the elected office-bearers; (iv) for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from in any way filling up the vacancies in the Trust Board of the defendant-Society by nomination from among the members who are not elected office-bearers; (v) for a mandatory injunction, not to delegate powers vested with the management of the defendant society which is a non-statutory body; (vi) for mandatory injunction to restrict the powers of the board of trustees; for mandatory injunction to comply with the mandatory provisions of Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 and for further reliefs.

(3.) COUNSEL for the plaintiff argued that under Section 16 of the 1860 Act, a Governing Body could consist of governors, council, directors, committee, trustees, or other body. As per Section 15(1) of the present Act, only the Governing Body has to manage the affairs of the society. As per Section 53 of the present Act, all the societies registered under the Act are deemed to have been registered under the present Act. Therefore, the Act and Rules of the present Act applies to all those societies even though they were registered under 1860 Act. This Court in the decision reported in R. Karuppan Advocate v. P.K. Rajagopal, Secretary, Advocates' Association, High Court (2001 (3) CTC 486) has held that any bye-law violative of the Act or Rules made thereunder is invalid. Therefore, only such of those bye-laws which are in consonance with the Act and Rules, which are not violative of the Act and Rules alone are valid. Therefore, the counsel for the plaintiff argued that under the new Act, all the members of the Committee defined under Section 2 (a) which is the Governing Body shall be elected as per Section 15 (3) of the Act. Further, the term of the Committee shall not exceed three years. But as per the bye-law 12, the powers of the Committee is made subject to the powers of the trustee. Similarly, Clause 19 also makes the Committee subject to the powers of the trustees; that is, the powers of the Committee is made subject to the powers of the Board of Trustees. Under the Act, the Committee consists of elected members whereas the board of trustees is not elected; they are only nominated and therefore, the Committee consists of even non-elected members. The making of the elected body subject to the nominated body is contrary to the Act.