H RAJESHKUMAR Vs. FAIRLANDS RECREATION CLUB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff in O.S.No.3 of 1996 against the dismissal of his prayer for the relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendant from committing any acts like amending the rules of defendant's society in derogation to the plaintiff's voting right in the defendant's society. The defendant has preferred cross objection against the decree and judgment in O.S.No.3 of 1996 on the file of the Court of Additional District Judge, Salem in respect of declaration that the defendant's Committee decision dated 18.12.1995 in respect of plaintiff's voting right in the defendant's society is void, contrary to law and unenforceable.

(2.) THE short facts of the case of the plaintiff in the plaint relevant for deciding this appeal are as follows: THE plaintiff had joined the defendant's Club as a member in the year 1989 as a patron. He had taken part in all the Annual General Body Meetings and the election proceedings of the defendant from the date of joining till the year 1995. In fact many of plaintiff's category had served as elected members of defendant's various Executive Committee. THE plaintiff's father had also an elected committee member for the year 1991-93 subsequent to this defendant's election as Secretary of the Department Society. In the month of August, 1995 the plaintiff was orally informed by the then Committee members that the plaintiff has no voting right in the defendant club being an associate member of Fairlands Co-operative House Building Society No.864. Hence the plaintiff had addressed to the defendant on 25.8.1995 to enroll his name in the voter's list of defendant's society to enable him to take part in ensuing election of the defendant's society for the year 1995-96 and to provide the voter's list. THE election for the management of defendant's society had also conducted on 17.9.1995 along with Annual General Body Meeting without any regard to the plaintiff's demand. On 10.11.1995, the plaintiff had forwarded a reminder to the defendant's society to explain the defendant's societies stand about the plaintiff's demand for inclusion of his name in the voter's list of the defendant and the reasons for not replying to his demand. THE defendant had not chosen to reply for the best reasons known to him. On 11.12.1995, a fervent appeal was made by the plaintiff to the defendant for the reinforcement of his voting right. On 20.12.1995, the plaintiff was served with a letter dated 19.12.1995 from the defendant informing that the Executive Committee of the defendant had decided that an associate member of Fairland Cooperative House Building Society has no voting right in the defendant's club. THE decision of the Executive Committee of defendant in respect of the plaintiff's voting right is unjust and the same is contrary to the Rules and Regulations of the defendant. THE defendant's society is estopped from denying the plaintiff's rights, since from the date of joining the defendant's society, the plaintiff had been serving with defendant's club with full voting right only. Hence the suit for declaration and injunction.

(3.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the respondent who had preferred cross objection in respect of the declaratory prayer. The contention of the defendant is that the plaintiff is only an associate member of the defendant Fairlands Recreation Club is not entitled to have the voting right in the executive Body of the Association. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/ respondent in cross objection would contend that even in the year 1990, he is a member of Salem Fairlands Cooperative Housing Building Society Limited and as per bye law of the defendant's society, he is having the right of vote in the Executive Committee election. This point has been elaborately discussed by the learned trial Judge extracting the memorandum of Rules for the defendant's society as "Article 9(f)(i) of the memorandum of Rules, a patrons, life members and ordinary members of defendant-Fairlands Recreation Club is entitled to voting right". Two main criteria required for a member of the defendant's society to exercise his voting right is that he should be a member of the Salem Fairlands Cooperative House Building Society Limited or the residents of the Fairlands Colony, then only he will be eligible to vote in the Annual General or Exordinary General Body Meeting of the Club. Even in the plaint, the plaintiff has specifically stated that he is a patron as well as a life member of the Fairlands cooperative House Building Society. According to the plaintiff, he is the life member of the defendant's society whereas according to the defendant, he is an associate member and not life member. But to show that the plaintiff is only an associate member of the defendant's society, the defendant has not produced any material. The communication sent by the defendant to the plaintiff under Ex B4 reads that since the plaintiff is only an associate member of the society he is not entitled to vote in the General Body meeting as per the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Rules. There is no relevant provision produced by the learned counsel for the cross objector in the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Rules 1988 to show that an associate member of the society is not eligible to vote in the General Body meeting of the society. So as per Article 9(f)(i) of the defendant's memorandum, being a member of the Fairlands Cooperative House Building Society Limited, the plaintiff is entitled to vote in the executive meeting. The apprehension of the plaintiff is that now the defendant is making an attempt to amend the memorandum of Rules of the defendant's society in derogation to the plaintiff's voting right. So on the date of filing of the suit, there is no memorandum of Rules in the defendant's society, debarring the plaintiff, a member of the Fairlands Cooperative House Building Society Limited from exercising the right of his franchise in the election to the General Body of the defendant. In the absence of any material to show that the plaintiff is only an associate member of the Fairlands Cooperative House Building Society Limited and that he is not a member of the Fairlands Cooperative House Building Society to vote in the General Body Meeting, the cross objection filed by the defendant cannot stand scrutiny for a moment.