DINANATH AJABRAO INGOLE Vs. SHETKARI SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revisional applicants are original defendants, while the non-applicants 1 to 3 are the original plaintiffs. The non-applicants instituted a Regular Civil Suit No. 359 of 1981 for declaration and injunction before the court of 4th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Wardha. In the said suit, interalia, they claimed declaration that original plaintiffs No. 2 and 3 are the President and Secretary of the original plaintiff No. 1 society, which is a registered public trust. They further sought a declaration to the effect that the original defendants present applicants, are no longer the President and Vice President of the said registered public trust, and lastly they claimed permanent injunction retraining the defendants from functioning as President and Vice-President respectively.

(2.) The background of the facts resulting in the filing of the said suit are also necessary for appreciation of the grounds contended in this revision.

(3.) The plaintiff No. 1 is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1960 bearing Registration No. Maharashtra/47/76(W). The said Society is also registered as a public trust under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, bearing registration No. F-223(W). The said Society runs 3 schools -- 2 of them are Wardha and one at Bhuigaon. It was alleged that the original defendants Nos. 1 and 2 i. e. present applicants Nos. 1 and 2m were the President and Vice President of the plaintiff society (public trust). They further alleged that defendant No. 2 came to be disqualified and removed for non-payment of the requisite monthly subscription to the Society by an order dated 9-10-1979. The said declaration regarding disqualification of defendant No. 2 came to be confirmed in General Body meeting dated 3-1-1981. It was also alleged that the said disqualification was informed to the Deputy Charity Commissioner vide change report, which came to be accepted on 25-9-1980. It was then alleged in the plaint that defendant No. 2 filed an application on 14-4-1980 stating that he would make the payment regularly. Thereafter, the defendant No. 2 again came to be enrolled as a member of the said society and Vice-President by a resolution of the Executive Body dated 15-4-1980. It was again alleged that on 15-12-1980 the plaintiff No. 3 received a representation signed by members of the society calling upon him to hold an urgent general body meeting in view of the unauthorised acts performed by the defendant No. 1. In pursuance of the said representation, plaintiff No. 3, issued a notice of meeting dated 18-121980. The said meeting was held on 25-12-1980 and was attended by 16 members. It was also alleged that on 18-12-1980, the defendant No. 1 issued a letter informing the plaintiff No. 3 that the meeting dated 25-12-1980 would be illegal since it would not be in consonance with clause 11 of the Constitution of the society.