RAMESH CHANDRA Vs. SHYAM JI MISRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been preferred against order dated 20.4.2004 whereby application under Section 5A of the Societies Registration Act seeking permission to alienate property of the society was dismissed as having become infructuous.

(2.) Before coming to grips with the respective contentions advanced across the bar, I would like to have a brief resume of necessary facts. Sri Triveni Madhav Prayagwal Shiksha Sabha Allahabad is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. Initially, an application was moved in April 1990 praying therein to accord permission to alienate property in dispute described in the application on certain grounds. This application protracted so much so that during pendency of the application, a sale deed was executed by Secretary of the society on 20.6.2001. Subsequently, by means of impugned order, the application was dismissed by the District Judge on the ground of having become infructuous regard being had to the fact that the sale deed had already been executed during pendency of the application and therefore, it was observed, the application for grant of permission was liable to be rejected as infructuous.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner urged that the right of parties shall be determined on the date on which action is instituted in the Court urging further that on that date application made for seeking permission from the District Judge to execute sale deed contained requisite details which entailed transfer of certain property of the society. He further urged that application should have been decided on merits urging further that in case during pendency of the application any sale deed had been executed, the same was liable to be governed by the final orders passed by the District Judge on merits. He further urged that the order dismissing the application as Infructuous suffered from the error apparent on the face of the record. He also relied upon two decisions namely Rameshwar and Ors. v. Jot Ram and Ors., 1976 1 SCR 847 and Kishan alias Krishan Kumar v. Manoj Kumar, 1998 1 SCR 830, to reinforce his contention that right of parties is decided as regards the cause of action attended with further submission that procedural delay if any cannot affect the rights accruing from initial cause of action. In opposition, learned Counsel appearing for the opposite parties claiming themselves members of the society, urged that their impleadment was allowed by the District Judge in the application in which permission to execute sale deed was sought. Ultimately it was urged that order was rightly passed dismissing the application on the ground that in view of execution of sale deed application had become infructuous.