Rakesh Kumar vs Shree Swami Santpati Shivnarayan Sant Samaj Sudhar Samiti and another

Hon''ble B.S. Verma, J.—Heard Sri Lokendra Dobhal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant and perused the record.

This second appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 29-09-2011, passed by Additional District Judge/IVth F.T.C., Dehradun in Civil Appeal No. 49 of 2006, Rakesh Kumar Vs. Swami Santpati Shivnarayan Sant Samaj Sudhar and another, whereby the judgment dated 16-05-2006, and decree dated 29-05-2006, passed by Civil Judge 1st (J.D.) Dehradun, in O.S. No. 189 of 1995, Swami Santpati Shiv Narayan Sant Samaj Sudhar Samiti vs. Daya Ram Ragorhi and another, was affirmed.

Briefly stated the facts of the case giving rise to this appeal, as per plaint case, are that Shree Swami Sant Pati Shiv Narayan Sant Samaj is a registered society bearing registration No. 1041/1974 situated at 203/1, E.C. Road Karanpur Dehradun and working for the welfare of Saint Society and providing help to orphan and destitute persons by maintaining library and orphan homes. On 25-12-1994 an election of the office bearers of the society was held in which Chandan Lal, President, Chote Lal Vice-President, Suresh Chand Secretary, Rakesh Kumar, Additional Secretary, Mahesh Chand Treasurer, Shiv Charan Accountant, Harbans Lal Secretary, Smt. Shanti Devi Pujari and Om Prakash, Kundan Lal, Ashok Kumar were elected as members.

It was also alleged that Chandan Lal, President of the society connived with the other society of the same name situated at G-175, Nehru Colony and stared causing damages to the plaintiff and on 25-04-1995 a general body meeting was called upon and Chandan Lal was removed from the post of President and Deepak Rao was elected in place of him. Dayaram Ragori along with Vice-President Chota Lal and Additional Secretary Rakesh Kumar also started causing damage to the society and they were asked to refrain themselves from indulging anti-society activities but they never refrained themselves from anti-society activities. Therefore a meeting of the members was organized on 12-06-1995 and both of them were removed from their posts and Surendra Kumar was elected as Vice-President and Om Prakash was elected as Additional Secretary. On 22-02-1995 a legal notice was sent to both of them to hand over their charge, but they failed to do so and both of them are still representing as office bearers of the society and not handed over the charge. It is further alleged that property bearing No. 203/1, E.C. Raod, Dehradun is the exclusive property of the plaintiff consisting of building, garden, temple and samadhi and tenants are also residing there. Sri Suresh Chand is indulging in anti-society activities and representing him as office bearer and misguiding the public at large and interfering in peaceful functioning of the society, whereas he had already been removed from the post, thereby he be restrained by decree of permanent injunction to interfere in the matter of society. It is also alleged that new office bearers had already taken over the charge on 25-12-1994, therefore the defendants be also restrained from interfering in the functioning of the society.

The suit was resisted by defendants by filing W.S. and the allegations raised in the plaint have been denied and it was alleged that the suit is misconceived and baseless. It was also stated in the W.S. that Suresh Chand has no concern with the affairs of the society and his membership has already been terminated. It was also alleged that the suit has been filed by Suresh Chand with intent to grab the property of society and he has no right to claim permanent injunction in the affairs related to society. The defendants 1 and 2 are elected members of the society and election was held according to the constitution of the society and the plaintiff-society has no right to remove them from the posts. It was further alleged that plaintiff Suresh Chand has no right to institute the suit, neither he has been authorized, therefore, the suit is liable to dismissed.

The trial court, on the basis of pleadings of parties, framed necessary issues in the suit. Thereafter parties led evidence in the suit and the trial court after perusal of entire evidence on record, decreed the suit.

Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by trial court, the defendant Rakesh Kumar preferred Civil Appeal No. 49 of 2006.

The First Appellate Court after hearing parties and re-appraisal of evidence of parties has held that on 25-12-1994 election of society was held in which Chander Lal, Pradhan, Chote Lal, Up-Pradhan, Suresh Chand, Pradhan Sachiv, Rakesh Kumar, Up Sachiv, Mahesh Chand, Treasurer, Shiv Charan, Accountant, Harbans Lal, Mantri and Smt. Shanti Devi, Om Prakash, Kundan Lal, Koshali, Ashok Kumar were elected as members of executive body. It is also held that on 25-6-1995 a general body meeting of the society was called upon in which present appellant Rakesh Kumar was removed from his post of Additional Secretary. Paper No. 77-A/8 was also filed showing the new elected executive body of the society for the period 2000 to 2004, in which present appellant stands nowhere. The defendants also failed to lead any evidence to substantiate the contentions raised by them. The court also observed in its order that by perusal of record it shows that executive body to govern the affairs of the society is elected after every five years and the present appellant was elected as additional secretary on 25.12.1994 and was removed from his post on 15.6.1995. The society preferred the suit against the appellant seeking relief to the extent that the defendants/appellant be restrained to interfere in the affairs of the society and after election, new executive body has taken over the charge of the affairs of the society hence nothing has left in favor of appellant. The appeal preferred by Rakesh Kumar was dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by trial court was affirmed.

Now feeling by the aforesaid judgments and decree, the appellant has preferred this second appeal before this court.

As per admitted case of the appellant also, as on today, Suresh Chand is not the elected office bearer of the society. The suit was filed by Suresh Chand on behalf of the society and the court restrained the defendants not to interfere in the peaceful functioning of the society. The injunction was not granted in favor of Suresh Chand in his personal capacity. He has filed the suit on behalf of the Society. By perusal of judgments and decree passed by courts below it transpires that new executive body of the society has been elected, wherein neither Suresh Chand nor defendant/appellant Rakesh Kumar are office bearers of the society. Again new election of executive body of the society has been held and with effect from 12-9-2010 new executive committee of the society has been formed. Along with this appeal copy of executive body has also been annexed as Annexure No. 12, but there is no evidence whether this committee of management has been approved or not?.

Whether Suresh Chand or the defendants were office bearers or not of the society, is a finding of fact and both the courts below have given concurrent finding of fact on this point holding that these persons have been removed from the office bearers of the society and new election was held and new executive body of the society has been formed, hence they have no concern with the affairs of the society. I find that no substantial question of law is involved in this appeal and the same is not liable to be admitted.

This second appeal is dismissed in limine.