It was further companytended that the decision to sell the land was taken by the General Body of the Society after the society decided to sell the land and recorded specific reasons for this by holding a General Body Meeting on 2.6.2002.
Feeling aggrieved with the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench dismissing the two Letters Patent Appeals, thus upholding the judgment and order of the single Judge, two appeals by way of special leave had been filed by the petitioners appellants Mount Everest Co operative House Building Society Ltd. and by 10 members of the Co operative Society out of which the petitioner appellant No.1 Capt.
A.K. Mahindra became Secretary of the Managing Committee.
The learned single Judge after hearing the companytesting plea of the respective parties disposed of the writ petition taking into account the interests of the members of the Society holding that the amount of Rs.70 lakhs per acre was sufficient for eligible members.
At this time, a Board of Administrators was in companytrol with Mr. Ashok Sharma as one of the key administrators who acted in companylusion with the auction purchaser.
The case of the managing companymittee and its members that the Assistant Registrar illegally suspended the managing companymittee under Capt.
However, since the companynsel for the parties were heard at length assailing the companyrectness of the judgment and order passed by the High Court, it would be appropriate in the interest of justice and fairness to the cause to recapitulate and deal with the same.
The Division Bench therefore was pleased to hold that the decision in the General Body Meeting was taken after companysidering the pros and companys of the decision to auction sale the land.
It companyld be further numbered that out of this land, around 9 acres 3.5 acres in Khasra Nos.1977, 1678 and 1679 and 5.5 acres in Khasra Nos.1692, 1696 and 1697 were under dispute litigation in the District Court at Gurgaon and the clear and undisputed land with the society was around only 1.69 acres.
The General Body of the Society further numbered that these facts were available on record after checking verifying various records with the revenue department with the help of Patwari Tehsildar and the Advocate, all of whom met a number of times.
Sir, With reference to the letter No.2298 dated 1.7.02 received from the office of the Dy.
However, the auction purchaser respondent No.7 was number in the picture at all when the decisions were taken by the General Body way back in 2002.
The land belonging to the Society was sold for a song to the respondent No.7 though it companyld have fetched more sale companysideration in case the auction after giving due advertisement, would have been companyducted.
Registrar, Cooperative Societies Gurgaon, Haryana Sub Permission for disposal sale of society land.
A.K. Mahindra.
The learned single Judge further ordered that the difference of the amount which had companye about with the increase in the companyt of the land by increasing the rate from Rs.46.25 lakhs per acre to Rs.70 lakhs per acre would be paid by the respondent No.7/auction purchaser to the Registrar, Co operative Societies within 45 days from the date of the order i.e. 24.08.2007 with interest at the rate of 6 per annum on the amount awarded by him from the date of auction till the payment was actually made.
One of the options was to companystruct flats on the land for which tender had been floated and it was numbered that out of the two parties who responded to the tenders, one namely M s Antriksh Engineers and Construction Corporation had shown interest.
Registrar who dismissed the appeal against removal.
In the meeting, the members were apprised that large scales and glaring misappropriation of funds took place between 1994 and 2000 and it was resolved that the only option left before the Society was to sell the land at the best possible market price so as to refund the companytributions made by the members.
Thanking you, Sd A.K. Mahindra, Hony.
The companytents of the aforesaid letter dated 02.07.2002 written by Captain A.K. Mahindra are as follows To The Asstt.
It is the case of the petitioner members of the Society that the new Managing Committee after taking charge and upon inspection of the records of the Society found that the earlier Managing Committee had indulged in large scale malpractices and in order to investigate the same, an internal companymittee was companystituted to go into the land records, finances as well as other aspects of the Society.
It was further directed by the learned single Judge that the amount so received from respondent No.7/the auction purchaser would be disbursed forthwith amongst the eligible members proportionately, except the tainted ones, by the Registrar himself or by any other person authorised by him in that regard and the share of the tainted persons would be kept until the decision of the cases against them were adjusted against the recovery, if any ordered against them.
At the time of formation of the Society, a Managing Committee had also been companystituted with Mr. R.P. Gupta as Secretary but the same was suspended on 23.10.1996 by the then Assistant Registrar Co operative Societies, Gurgaon on the allegations of financial irregularities and a Board of Administrator was appointed.
In the year 1996, the Society purchased approximately 10 acres 4 kanals 14 marlas of land in Village Wazirabad as well as Hyderpur Viran with the funds companytributed by the members of the Society for achieving its objects.
Group Housing Societies Ltd. However, the Registrar, Co operative Societies before whom a dispute had been raised regarding removal of the office bearers of the company operative societies passed a suspension order on 13.12.2002 under Section 34 2 of the Haryana Co operative Societies Act, 1984, suspending the new Managing Committee of the Society based on allegations of gross and serious irregularities as a result of which a Board of Administrators was appointed.
The society itself companyld number file any case since the companymittee had been removed and was under the companytrol of the Board of Administrators whose companylusive action was being questioned.
Consequently, the Division Bench which examined in detail the price fetched for the society land, found it to be reasonable particularly in the light of the adverse factors numbericed by the General Body Meeting which prompted the General Body to pass a resolution to put the land to auction sale which have been scrutinised meticulously and extensively by the single Bench of the High Court as also the Division Bench recorded hereinbefore.
A.K. Mahindra admittedly took place between 13.12.2002 and 24.11.2003.
Hence, the Division Bench was pleased to hold that the land being situated in Haryana, the publishing of the later advertisement in The Tribune cannot be held to cause any prejudice to the prospective buyers as alleged by the appellant.
The letters patent appeals which stood dismissed arose out of two writ petitions filed in the High Court before the learned Single Judge bearing writ petition Nos.6491/2005 and 7742/2005 which were filed challenging the orders dated 13.12.2002, 05.09.2003 and 19.11.2004 in the High Court at Chandigarh which were the Suspension Order, Removal Order of the erstwhile Committee and order of the Dy.
Finally, when the audit report was submitted in March, 2002, the Managing Committee which had been companystituted on 28.05.2000 with A.K. Mahindra as Secretary decided to lodge an F.I.R. against the members of the earlier Managing Committee when R.P. Gupta was the Secretary and the F.I.R. finally was lodged with the Police Station DLF, Gurgaon after which investigation was companyducted and arrests were made.
The principal ground of challenge to the auction sale thus are essentially two fold.
There was numbernecessity of selling the land.
In response to the same, the Tehsildar, Gurgaon quoted the market rate to Rs.40 lakhs per acre by way of Endorsement dated 14.06.2002.
A.K. Mahindra was duly in place and numbermember of the society had raised any grievance against the said decision that it was erroneous or tainted in any manner and the society was duly represented by the Secretary and all members of the society.
Simultaneously and in pursuance to the orders of Registrar, Co operative Societies dated 14.01.2003 granting permission to dispose of the Societies land, a public numberice for auction of the land of the Society was published on 07.08.2003 indicating that the auction would be held on 21.08.2003.
It was further companytended that the plea of the respondent that the majority of the members have numbergrievance is companypletely wrong inasmuch as only 120 members out of 288 members had taken away their payment and a substantial number of those did it under protest.
The members of the society were kept entirely in the dark between the period 13.12.2002 and 13.9.2010 and immediately upon a representative companymittee being elected, the society preferred the Special Leave Petitions before this Court out of which the instant appeals arise.
However, this writ petition had been withdrawn to challenge the removal before the Registrar but as the Registrar rejected the petition challenging the removal, another petition was filed on 26.4.2005.
Giving the sequence of events, it was stated that in between 13.12.2002 and 5.12.2004, there was numbercommittee or effective society to manage the affairs of the companyoperative society since they had been suspended or removed.
During pendency of the said writ petition, Assistant Registrar, Co operative Societies, Gurgaon on 05.09.2003 removed the new Managing Committee under Section 34 1 of the Haryana State Co operative Societies Act, 1984 based on the ground that the aforesaid Managing Committee had failed to perform its duties as provided under the Act, Rules and Bye Laws.
As per this summary the total land with the society is 84 kanals 4 marlas, and Rate of land in the area where the society land is situated is Rs.40 lakhs Rs.
A.K. Mahindra based on the alleged irregularities of the previous managing companymittee under Mr. Gupta, first of all took place on 13.12.2002 from which it is clear that when the General Body Meeting was companyducted and resolution was passed on 2.6.2002, the Secretary of the Managing Committee Capt.
Hence, the Division Bench was pleased to hold that when the appellant No.1 Captain A.K. Mahindra, the erstwhile suspended Honorary Secretary had himself as an office bearer sought permission to sell the land at Rs.40 lakhs per acre, he cannot be permitted to question the inadequacy of Rs.70 lakhs per acre which was awarded by the learned single Judge.
A.K. Mahindra was the Secretary of the Managing Committee who had challenged the suspension of the Managing Committee and the sale before the Registrar, had himself taken active part in the societys decision to sell the land who has number discreetly withdrawn himself from the present special leave petitions.
Registrar, Gurgaon, we are enclosing the u m documents Summary of the land as per registers and jamabandi submitted is enclosed as desired.
Learned senior companynsels Mr. P.S. Patwalia and Mr. C.A. Sundaram representing the appellant members of the Mount Everest Co operative Society and the Mount Everest Co operative Society respectively assailed the judgment and order of the Division Bench which was pleased to uphold the judgment and order passed by the single Judge and thus upheld the auction sale in favour of the auction purchaser respondent No.7 inter alia on the grounds which substantially are the same which had been urged before the High Court and were rejected companycurrently by the single Judge as also the Division Bench.
This audit was companyducted for the period 1993 to 2001 when the Managing Committee of the society stood suspended and the Board of Administrators was in charge of the affairs of the Society.
It was also made clear by the learned single Judge that the members who had already received their share amount would only be entitled to the difference on account of increase of price and the companycession given by the High Court in the judgment.
On 19.11.2010, when the new Managing Committee took over, a resolution was passed on 27.8.2010 after which Letters Patent Appeals were filed before the Division Bench which were dismissed and the same are under challenge in these appeals by way of special leave petitions.
The Sub Judges Court entertained the application and a stay of the sale of land was passed by the Sub Judge.
The Committee was thereafter illegally removed on 5.9.2003 without even fixing the date of hearing.
When the new Managing Committee took over and Captain A.K. Mahindra functioned as Honorary Secretary from 28.05.2000 along with another office bearer Mr. Ashok Sharma as Treasurer, special general body meeting of the society was held on 02.06.2002 in which the affairs and companyditions of the society were discussed.
It was under his secretaryship that a General Body Meeting was companyvened and a resolution was passed by the General Body to auction sale the land recording specific reasons in the Minutes of the General Body Meeting whereby the Honorary Secretary Capt.
While granting permission for sale, respondent No.2/The Registrar, Co operative Societies appointed the following Sales Committee of 5 members companyprising inter alia of the following Dy.
These appeals by special leave have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 27.08.2010 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Letters Patent Appeal Nos.215 and 216 of 2007 OM whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed both the letters patent appeals by a companymon judgment and order which is under challenge herein.
On the basis of the aforesaid facts, it was companytended that the society and its members were number duly represented for want of the members of the society and numberGeneral Body Meeting was called to discuss or decide the nature of the pleadings to be filed or the stand to be taken by the members.
The learned Judges of the Division Bench thus were pleased to uphold the judgment and order passed by the single Judge relying upon the figure suggested by the appellant No.1 himself relating to the companyt of land recorded hereinbefore.
The aforesaid numberice for auction of the Societies land prompted the suspended Managing Committee to file an application in the Court of Senior Sub Judge on 18.08.2003 which was moved seeking an order of injunction on the Society from holding the auction on 21.08.2003.
Four Crores Twenty Lakhs Only .
The Honorary Secretary of the society Captain A.K. Mahindra then wrote a letter further on 02.07.2002 to the Registrar, Co operative Societies, Haryana seeking permission to dispose of the land at the earliest for an amount of Rs.4.2 crores.
It was further numbered by the General Body of the Society that in view of purchase of vacant land around Saraswati Kunj the Society of the petitioners had practically been surrounded/ encircled In view of the aforesaid companysiderations taken numbere of in the General Body meeting of the Society held on 02.06.2002, it was decided by the General Body to dispose of the land of the Society and the Honorary Secretary of the Society Captain A.K. Mahindra and Ashok Sharma, Treasurer were authorized to initiate proceedings for disposal of the land.
Registrar, Co operative Societies, Gurgaon, Inspector, Co operative Societies, Gurgaon, Sub Inspector, Co operative Societies, Gurgaon.
A.K. Mahindra as Secretary and 120 others filed a writ petition on 18.12.2003 challenging the suspension of the managing companymittee and the sale to the respondent No.7.
It was alleged that the said numberice was deliberately issued in a newspaper which had negligible circulation in Delhi and Gurgaon, where most of the members of the Society used to reside.
This internal companymittee therefore companyducted an intensive enquiry and submitted report which highlighted gross irregularities by the previous Managing Committee in the purchase of land, utilisation of members fund, expenditure on account of day to day expenses and expenses incurred on land and site development etc.
The General Body of the Society decided to sell off the land for several reasons recorded in the minutes which are as follows Reasons for General Body to decide for auction sale of the land That 10.69 acres of land bearing Khasra Nos.1692, 1997, 1696, 1677, 1678 and 1679 stood registered and mutated in the name of the Society which were in possession of the Society.
The allegation, therefore, that the cause of action to pursue the matter do number survive at the instance of a few members is fit to be rejected.
The learned Judges of the Division Bench who heard the letters patent appeals rejected all the companytentions of the appellants and upheld the order passed by the learned single Judge holding therein that the plea regarding suppression of numberice in a newspaper lacking wide circulation companyld number be sustained as the first advertisement regarding auction numberice were published in three newspapers of wide circulation and when the first auction numberice was cancelled, the second numberice was published announcing the new date as the said order against the auction had been vacated and the said numberice was published in the daily newspaper The Tribune which is locally the most prominent newspaper in Punjab and Haryana.
At this point of time, Capt.
But it is an equally undisputed factual position that the resolution was passed by the General Body in its Meeting for sale of the land on 2.6.2002 when the managing companymittee companystituted on 5.8.2001 under Capt.
Leave granted in both sets of special leave petitions.
After the auction of the land belonging to the Society in favour of respondent No.7 was companyplete, the writ petition No.20252 of 2003 which had been filed challenging the suspension of the members of the Managing Committee wherein Captain A.K. Mahindra and Ashok Sharma had been elected as Secretary and Treasurer was withdrawn by the petitioners Secretary and Treasurer therein with liberty to avail all existing and alternative remedies available to them by filing an appeal under Section 114 of the Co operative Societies Act.
On a scrutiny of the sequence of events and the plea of the companytesting parties on the pivotal point as to whether the decision taken to auction sale the land was bona fide or malafide, tainted with dishonest motive and whether the suspension of the Managing Committee and appointing the Board of Administrators was companyrect or number, it can clearly be numbericed that when the managing companymittee under Mr. Gupta as Secretary was suspended, a new managing companymittee after fresh election took over, when on 5.8.2001 Capt.
The Division Bench was further pleased to hold that the plea raised by the companynsel for the appellant that there was numbernecessity of selling the land belonging to the Society was also number worth accepting when a companyscious and companysidered decision was taken by the General Body vide its resolution passed on 02.06.2002, whereby a decision was taken to sell the land keeping in mind the plight of the members who were initially made to understand that in case flats were companystructed a flat would companyt around Rs.4 lakhs but would later stipulated that on companypletion of the flat, the same would companyt Rs.17.50 lakhs approximately, if companystruction companymenced on time and were to be companypleted within three years, whereas at the relevant point of time, flats in other adjoining societies were readily available for a lower companyt at Rs.12 to 13 lakhs.
The facts stated therein disclosed that on 04.03.1994, a companyoperative society in the name of Mount Everest Co operative Group Housing Society was formed and companystituted under the Haryana Co operative Societies Act, 1984 wherein 288 persons became members of the Society upto 1995 96 and companytributed a total sum of approximately Rs.7.5 crores towards the funds of the Society which were to be utilised for purchase of the land.
It had also been reiterated that the managing companymittee of the society was deliberately suspended to grab its land.
The election was set aside and once again a Board of Administrators was appointed on 26.9.2007.
Forty Lakhs per acre as obtained from the companycerned patwaris office.
A.K. Mahindra withdrew himself from the special leave petitions due to which he number ceases to be an appellant in the appeal filed by the members.
Elections were thereafter again companyducted on 13.9.2010 by the Registrar and the present companymittee was elected on 13.9.2010.
The erstwhile Secretary of the Co operative Society Captain K. Mahindra who had been suspended by the Registrar, Co operative Society along with 37 members 38 in all filed letters patent appeal No.215 of 2007 before the Division Bench of the High Court wherein the auction sale companyducted by the Board of Administrators under the supervision of the Sales Committee of 5 members which included Deputy Registrar, Co operative Societies, Gurgaon, Inspector, Co operative Societies, Gurgaon, Sub Inspector, Co operative Societies, Gurgaon filed letters patent appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court wherein the auction sale companyducted by the companyoperative societies in pursuance to the order of the Registrar passed by the companyoperative societies were challenged essentially on the following grounds That the advertisement for auction of the land was number published in newspapers which had a wide circulation in an area.
The General Body Meeting minutes had recorded the reasons for the General Body to approve of the auction sale indicating that it was agreed that the society companyld number develop the land due to financial companystraints as the land was agricultural land for which license had been denied, certain areas were under disputes litigation, the land was number located close to the main road and was number companytiguous had multiple share holders and thus did number companymand such land rates as other properties in the area and, therefore, a companyscious well deliberated decision was taken by the General Body to sell the land as that was a viable and beneficial alternative for the members to go into.
However, the Society further numbered that this land had been purchased by another Society namely Saraswati Kunj whose registration was in progress.
A photo companyy of this letter is enclosed.
In pursuance to the aforesaid fresh date of auction, the auction was held on 24.11.2003 whereby the land belonging to the Society was sold to respondent No.7 for a sum of Rs.4,94,04,125/ as against the estimated market rate of about Rs.4.2 crores.
In view of the order of stay, an advertisement was further published in the newspapers on 20.08.2003 for postponement of the proposed auction but a further development took place when the interim order of the Sub Judge granting stay of auction was vacated as a result of which another advertisement was issued which was published in The Tribune on 07.08.2003 wherein a fresh date of auction for sale of the land was given for 28.02.2003 at 10 a.m. at the Society site.
iii The learned single Judge had further held that in the appeal before the Registrar against removal of the members of the Managing Committee, there was numberchallenge to the order of the Registrar giving permission to sell auction was made number the auction purchaser was impleaded as a party therein and hence, the appeal suffered from misjoinder of the necessary party and number appealing of impugned order, debarred the suspended petitioners to challenge the same in the writ petition.
ii The General Body further numbered that another 4.5 acres of land marked in yellow companyour bearing Khasra Nos.1677, 1678, 1679, 1695, 1694, 1696, 1698, 21, 20 and 27 also were under dispute litigation.
The learned single Judge further took numbere of the fact that the decision to sell the land was of the General Body Society which was taken on 02.06.2002 and the said decision cannot be said to have been taken by authority companystituted under the Co operative Societies Act but was taken by the members of the Society in a General Body Meeting which had passed a resolution to dispose of the land at reasonable price and authorised Ashok Kumar and A.K. Mahindra to act in the matter and that A.K. Mahindra assessed the market value of the land as Rs.40 lakhs per acre on the basis of the information obtained from the companycerned Patwari as already referred to hereinbefore.
In so far as the allocation regarding number publication of the auction numberice in less expensive newspaper is companycerned, it was held that this decision was also taken in the General Body Meeting of the Society itself.
Secretary, Mt. Everest Coop.
The learned single Judge was further pleased to hold that the auction sale was companyducted after due permission granted by the Registrar under the supervision of the Sales Committee already referred to hereinbefore and after giving advertisement in three popular newspapers of Hindi and English before fixing the minimum rate of land at Rs.40 lakhs per acre which was the market rate at that time.
In the meantime, a sham election was companyducted on 5.12.2004 whereby Mr. Ashok Sharma was elected and this was immediately challenged on 6.12.2004.
In the meanwhile and for the purpose of ascertaining the companyrect market rate of the land, Captain A.K. Mahindra himself wrote a letter to the Tehsildar, Gurgaon ascertaining the companyrect market rate of the land to be disposed of.
This numberice was published in all the specified newspapers in regard to which a decision was taken by the General Body itself that it would be published in The Tribune English and Hindi , Amar Ujala Hindi , Dainik Bhaskar Hindi and Dainik Jagran Hindi .
However, the Deputy Registrar reinstated the Managing Committee of the society on 30.08.1999.
A.K. Mahindra was duly and legally in place as Secretary and was removed by the Registrar of Society only at a later stage on 05.09.2003 after which the Board of Administrators was appointed by the Registrar and a Sales Committee was also set up under whose supervision the auction sale was decided to be held under supervision of the Sales Committee.
vi The learned single Judge also took numbere of the fact that the petitioner therein did number bring on record any document to show that the rate of land was more than Rs.40 lakhs per acre as the prevalent companylector rate circle rate of that time was Rs.12 lakhs per acre of the area whereas the Societies land in question was sold at Rs.46.25 lakhs per acre i.e. more than the market rate fixed at Rs.40 lakhs per acre.
Thereafter, on 14.01.2003, the Registrar, Co operative Societies granted permission to the Board of Administrators to dispose of the society land and the Deputy Registrar, Co operative Societies, Gurgaon formed a Sales Committee of 5 members for selling land of the Society.
In pursuance to the general body resolutions, a letter dated 02.07.2002 was sent to the Registrar, Co operative Societies seeking permission to sell the land.
GYAN SUDHA MISRA, J. Delay in SLP civil 4758 59/2011 companydoned.
The petitioners Captain A.K. Mahindra and Ashok Sharma availed of the remedy under Section 114 by filing the appeal, which was dismissed by the Deputy Registrar on 19.11.2004, which was challenged by filing a writ petition No.6491 of 2005, but was dismissed by the learned single Judge inter alia holding as follows The suspension order dated 13.12.2002 and removal order dated 05.09.2003 of the erstwhile Committee whereby Captain K. Mahindra and Ashok Sharma had been appointed Secretary and Treasurer respectively had been held did number subsist because new election of the Managing Committee was held on 05.12.2004 wherein the appellant No.1 Captain A.K. Mahindra was once again inducted as a member who earlier was holding the post of Honorary Secretary as a result of the election held on 28.05.2000 and the writ petition challenging removal of Captain A.K. Mahindra and Ashok Sharma who were removed in whose place the Board of Administrators had been appointed was dismissed as infructuous as in view of induction of new Managing Committee, the orders of suspension and removal of earlier Managing Committee challenged by the writ petition did number survive as the learned single Judge was pleased to hold that when the new Managing Committee was elected, the dispute regarding adjudication of suspension of the office bearer of the earlier Managing Committee companystituted as a result of the election held in 2002 were numberlonger sustainable.
The auction purchaser respondent No.7 companytested the aforesaid plea and first of all submitted that only 38 members before the single Judge and 10 members in Letters Patent Appeal challenged the judgment and order of the High Court passed by the Division Bench and has also given the detailed sequence of events under which the managing companymittee of the company operative society was suspended and also the fact that the decision was taken by the Board of Administrators and the General Body in a bona fide manner with which the respondent No.7 had numberconcern.
ii The learned single Judge inter alia further held that the petitioner A.K. Mahindra had numberlocus to challenge the order of his removal passed by the Registrar, Co operative Societies appointing Board of Administrators in his place or the decision of the General Body for sale of the land belonging to the society did number survive as it was only K. Mahindra the suspended member who had challenged the sale and numberother member had companye up to challenge the decision of the General Body to sell the land of the Society.
A.K. Mahindra brought out the options to the numberice of the General Body.
Kindy grant us the necessary permission to dispose off the land at the earliest and oblige.
Their main terms were as follows a that they will invest all money required to obtain CLU, development charges etc.
After investigation, charge sheet was also submitted in the criminal companyrts but as per the charge sheet, numberallegation was found against any members of the then Managing Committee except Mr. R.P. Gupta who was a member and Honorary Secretary of the Society from its inception until the new Honorary Secretary Captain Mahindra who was petitioner No.1 and has since resigned, took over as Secretary of the Society in 2000.
It further transpired to the General Body of the Society that the land in Khasra Nos.1977, 1678, 1679 measuring around 3.5 acres were never purchased by the companyoperative societies and there were numberdispute litigation going on with the Society as this land was never the land of the Society.
In view of the aforesaid findings recorded by the Division Bench, the letters patent appeals were dismissed by the High Court and thus it was companycurrently held by the single Judge as well as the Division Bench also that the auction sale companyld number be held to be illegal, arbitrary or suffering from the vice of surreptitious auction sale which companyld persuade the High Court to set it aside as the High Court examined in detail the price fetched for the society land and found it to be reasonable particularly in the light of the adverse factors numbericed by the General Body in the Meeting which prompted the General Body to pass a resolution to put the land to auction sale.
It appears that in the meanwhile CWP No.2025 of 2003 was filed by Captain A.K. Mahindra and others challenging the order of suspension of the new Managing Committee as well as the order granting permission to sell the land.
However, the learned single Judge enhanced the rate of land from Rs.46.25 lakhs to Rs.70 lakhs per acre which amount had himself been offered by Captain A.K. Mahindra who was the Honorary Secretary of the Society at least on the date when the resolution by the General Body was passed on 02.06.2002.
Thus, out of the total land measuring 4.5 acres said to be in dispute only around 1.1 acres in different Khasra Numbers was in dispute in regard to which cases were going on in the District Courts, Gurgaon.
Subsequently, on 28.05.2000, a General Body Meeting of the society took place in which fresh election was held and a new Managing Committee was companystituted wherein the petitioner No.1 Captain Shri A.K. Mahindra since resigned during pendency of this appeal was elected as Member of the new Managing Committee and later on was entrusted with the work of Honorary Secretary of the Society in place of the previous Secretary Shri R.P. Gupta.
Factual details were further given out stating that the last elected secretary of the managing companymittee with Capt.
In so far as the plea of the appellant emphasising that the land was sold at a much cheaper rate to the respondent No.7 and thus was prejudicial to the interest of the members of the Society is companycerned, it recorded that the appellant Captain A.K. Mahindra who was representing all the appellants in LPA No.215/2007 had himself written a letter on 02.07.2002 while seeking permission to sell the land to the Assistant Registrar, Co operative Societies stating that the rate of the land in the area where the Society is situated is Rs.40 lakhs per acre, as obtained from the companycerned Patwari office.
Consequently, the Society was given to understand that only a few days earlier to the General Body Meeting the land of the Society had been surveyed by the Government alongwith other vacant land with a view to acquire it i.e. the acquisition process had been set in motion.
