MAHARISH DAYANAND EDUCATION SOCIETY NEHRU GROUND, NIT, FARIDABAD AND OTHERS Vs. SATYENDRA BHADANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated 15.6.2000 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Faridabad whereby application filed by the Respondent -Plaintiff seeking permission of the Court to sue in a representative capacity under Order 1, Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') was granted.

(2.) THE facts have to be noticed in detail in view of the litigation which has ensued between the parties. Satyendra Bhadana and four others Plaintiffs had instituted a suit for declaration with a consequential relief of permanent injunction and mandatory injunction against the Defendants - It was prayed that the Defendants be restrained from holding the elections of four office bearers of Maharishi Dyanand Education Society (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society'), Defendant No. l on 21.2.1993 on the basis of list of members Annexure -A, as the genuine life members of the Society detailed in Annexures -B and 'D' had been excluded from participation in the election. In the alternative, it was also claimed that the Defendants be directed to delete the names of persons detailed in Annexure -A, who are not members of the Society and include those members, whose names are detailed in Annexure -C from the list of membership notified by Defendant No. 1 in the election programme and the lists of the members published on 9.2.1993 Annexure -A be declared, as void ab initio and illegal. Disqualification of Defendant Nos. 2 to 4 from the founder members of Defendant No. l was also sought.

(3.) THE suit was contested by the Defendants primarily on the ground that Plaintiff Nos. 2 and 5 were not members of the Society and for that reason they have no locus standi to file the suit. It was also pleaded that election notice to elect the members of the Governing Body was published in two local newspapers. In addition, separate notices were also sent on 21.2.1993 to all the bona fide life members of the society as borne out in the record of the society as on 1.2.1992 and 2.2.1993. According to them, only Plaintiff No. 1 was a life member of the Society. They also maintained that about 50 persons had filed objections which were found false and thus rejected. It was also explained that two receipt books were issued under the signatures of K.L. Mehta, which were found missing and used for making false members of the Society regarding which case was registered with the police and a public notice regarding its misplacement was also issued. They denied that they had mismanaged the affairs of the Society and they were attempting to have permanent control over the Governing Body.