(1.) The present revision petition has been filed by Maharishi Dayanand Education Society, Faridabad, and others hereinafter described as "the petitioners". It is directed against the order of the learned trial Court and that of the learned Additional District Judge, Faridabad, dated 1.2.1994 and 5.6.1998 respectively. The learned trial Court had allowed the application filed by the respondents under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The said order was upheld by the learned Addl. District Judge, Faridabad.
(2.) The relevant facts are that respondent Satyendra Bhadana and others had filed a civil suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the petitioners. It was alleged that the petitioner-Society is a registered educational society which is engaged in propagating the teachings of Maharishi Dayanand and for promoting the cause of education. It is running various educational institutions, schools and colleges in the area of Faridabad. The Governing Body of the petitioner-society consists of 15 members. Four are called the office bearers and others are members (non official members). The election was to be held every three years and the members of the general body only are eligible to elect members of the Governing Body. The term of the President and the Governing Body had expired and a public notice was issued notifying the election programme for electing only four mandatory seats, namely, President, Vice-President, Secretary and Treasurer. The Plaintiff-respondents claimed that they are bona fide members of the general body of petitioner No. 1. They had paid their subscription up to date. The members of the Governing Body were stated to be mismanaging the affairs of the petitioners-society and their activities were prejudicial and detrimental to the interest of justice. They were indulging in nefarious activities and causing financial loss to the society. They wanted to exercise control over the management of affairs of petitioner-society and with that in view they fabricated the membership record of the general body and added the names of about seventy persons in the list of members. Those 70 members were not the duly enrolled members of the petitioner-society nor they have paid their subscription. If false members were allowed to cast their votes, then the result of the election is likely to be materially affected. The election programme so notified, therefore, was stated to be illegal on the grounds that the public notice issued by the Secretary of the society is highly illegal because there is no post of the Secretary of the society; the election programme is tainted with illegality because it did not disclose the time, date and manner of election of the other eleven non-official members of the Governing Body; the name of the Election Officer/Returning Officer has not been mentioned; and above all, false names have been included only to affect the result of the election. Respondents No. 2 to 4 have been shown as founder members but, in fact, they are not so. During the pendency of the suit, the respondent-plaintiffs prayed for ad interim injunction to restrain the defendant-petitioners from holding the election.
(3.) In the written statement that was filed, civil suit as well as application seeking ad interim injunction was contested. It was asserted that respondent-plaintiffs have no locus standi to file the suit because they are not members of the Governing Body. Plaintiffs No. 2 to 5 were not even stated to be members of the society. According to the petitioners, Shri K.L. Mehta was promoting the cause of education with the help of Arya Samaj who could see the need of education for masses in the District of Faridabad. He died on 28.1.1993. The election notice to elect members of the Governing Body was duly published in two local newspaper. Notice for election to be held on 21.2.1993 was sent to all the bona fide life members on 1.2.1993 and 2.2.1993. Only respondent No. 1 (plaintiff No. 1) was admitted to be the bona fide life member of the society. It was denied that the petitioners have mismanaged the affairs of the society or that there was an attempt to have permanent control over the Governing Body. It was denied that the plaintiffs are entitled to get the election programme declared null and void. As per petitioners, 50 persons had raised objections and their membership was rejected because their assertions were found to be false. Two receipt books were issued. They were missing and First Information Report was lodged. The receipt books have been misused for creating false membership. Public Notice regarding misplacement of receipt books had been issued. On the basis of it, certain false members have been included.