DEVENDRA CHIMANLAL SHAH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners are seeking a direction to respondent No. 2-the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Society, to register "Shyam Kamal 'C' Society Limited" under the provisions of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The facts giving rise to the filing of this petition are not in dispute and are required to be briefly stated to appreciate the grievance of the petitioners.

(2.) The petitioners are residents of a building known as Shyam Kamal 'C' Society situate at Vile Parle (West), Bombay. Respondent No. 3 constructed this building in the year 1979 and the building consist of 60 residential flats and 57 shops. The petitioners are the purchasers of some flats and shop in the building. On October 6, 1981, the petitioners filed an application before respondent No. 2 for reservation of the name of the proposed society as 'Shyam Kamal 'C' Co-operative Society. The purchasers of the flats and shops had decided to constitute a co-operative society. In accordance with the application of the petitioners, respondent No. 2 informed that the name has been reserved and the petitioners should make the requisite application for registration in the prescribed form. Accordingly, the petitioners filed the application for registration on January 8, 1982. The petitioners contacted respondent No. 2 in March 1982 and respondent No. 2 raised certain queries and advised the petitioners to furnish the information. That was complied with, but respondent No. 2 sought compliance with some additional points by letter dated June 28, 1982 and letter dated August 9, 1982. The petitioners complied with the conditions which were within their power and informed respondent No. 2 that certain documents are in possession of respondent No. 3 builder and they could not be produced because of non-co-operation of respondent No. 3. On October 30, 1982, respondent No, 2 addressed a letter to the Chief Promoter complaining that some mis-representation has -been made for securing the registration of -the society and the promoters have not complied with certain conditions and builders have also raised certain objections. The petitioners have thereafter filed the present petition in this Court on June 30, 1983 complaining that respondent No. 2 is deliberately raising objections and declining to register the society in collusion with respondent No. 3, the builder.

(3.) On behalf of respondent No. 2, Shri P. P. Ghule, Deputy Registrar, has filed an affidavit sworn on July 22, 1983 for opposing admission of the petition. The same affidavit is used by respondent No. 2 to resist the relief sought in the petition. In paragraph 3 of this affidavit, the Deputy Registrar claims that the following documents are required from the builders-respondent No. 3 as per the Circular of Instructions dated May 2, 1980 issued by the State Government and these documents are not produced by the builders inspite of several opportunities. The documents are :