KAILAS RAVI SHANKER Vs. PAUL CHANDRAKANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both writ petitions, the petitioners are the same. Both the writ petitions are directed against the common judgment dated 30-10-1995 passed in C.T.A.Nos.45 of 1995 and 71 of 1995 on the file of the Cooperative Tribunal at Hyderabad confirming the Award passed by the Arbitrator/Cooperative Sub-Registrar dated 20-3-1995 passed in A.R.C.Nos.97 of 1993 and 7 of 1994. Hence the two writ petitions were clubbed and heard together and they are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The facts are many and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties are manifold. I do not find it necessary to refer to all the facts. Essential facts which can be noticed for the purpose of disposal of these writ petitions are stated briefly as under:

(3.) The petitioners and the respondents 1 to 12 are the Members of the 13th respondent Cooperative Housing Society. On 6-8-1984, it is claimed, that the Managing Committee of the Society passed a resolution resolving to allot two plots to each of the petitioners, and in pursuance of this resolution, sale deeds were executed by the President and the Treasurer in the month of August, 1984. Those sale deeds were cancelled subsequently by the Managing Committee on 29-7-1985. Thereafterwards, out of 16 plots, 12 plots were allotted to the respondents 1 to 12, on 5-11-1993 and the sale deeds were registered on 9-11-1993. Accord ing to the respondents 1 to 12, after the Person-in-charge of the Managing Committee allotted plots in their favour, the petitioners started interfering with their possession of the plots. Therefore, the respondents 1 to 12 filed A.R.C.No.97 of 1993 wherein they sought for declaration that allotments made in their favour by the Person-in-Charge of the Managing Committee of the 13th respondent- Society are valid and legal, and that the sale deeds executed in the month of August, 1984 by the former President and the Treasurer in favour of the petitioners were illegal, null and void, and for grant of consequential inj unctive relief. The petitioners filed A.R.T.C.No.7/1994 before the 14th respondent-Arbitrator for declaration that the cancellation of the sale deeds executed in their favour was illegal and void, and to declare that the allotment of plots in favour of the respondents 1 to 12 in the year 1993 was illegal and void, and for grant of perpetual injunction. Both these petitions were filed under Section 61 of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act (for short 'the Act'). The Arbitrator clubbed the petitions, and by his common order, allowed the petition filed by the respondents 1 to 12, and rejected the petition filed by the petitioners. The matter was carried before the Co-operative Tribunal by way of Appeals. The Cooperative Tribunal confirmed the order of the Arbitrator and dismissed the appeals. Hence these two writ petitions are filed against the common judgment of the Tribunal.