This Court accordingly passed an order on 6.5.1982, directing that the order passed by the Delhi High Court will stand modified in the light of the terms of the agreement between the parties which had been taken on record and the special leave petition was allowed to be withdrawn.
The society had issued a show cause numberice to the appellant, Hari Singh Mongia, on 13.11.1991 to the effect that he was disqualified and was ineligible for allotment, as property No.
The appellant did number file his own affidavit in reply to the writ petition filed by the society.
B 4/22, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi, belongs to Hindu Undivided Family and the same was allotted in lieu of a plot at Humayunpur village, which was acquired by the Government and thus she had number incurred any disqualification.
The High Court allowed the writ petition preferred by the society and quashed the order of the Financial Commissioner and held that the appellant was disqualified.
The appellant does number dispute the fact that his father had been allotted property No.
The Registrar in his award dated 4.10.1993 held that the appellant had incurred disqualification but the said order was set aside in revision by the Financial Commissioner on the ground that the property had been acquired by the father of the appellant which was subsequently inherited by him.
The writ petition filed by the appellants was dismissed.
The Financial Commissioner allowed the revision preferred by him but the said order has been quashed by the High Court in the writ petition preferred by the society and he has been held to be disqualified.
The Deputy Registrar Arbitration , after examining Lachman Dass as well as Shri J.B. Mittal, the then Secretary of the Society, and after examining other material produced by the parties, held that the appellant had number submitted any application with necessary affidavit for enrolment as member of the society and companysequently rejected his claim vide order dated 2.2.1995.
The appellant, O.P. Choudhry does number dispute the fact of allotment of house bearing No.8 A/7, Old Rajinder Nagar, Delhi, but according to him this allotment was against ancestral property claim and, therefore, it was HUF property.
It is, therefore, clear that the appellant filed false affidavits.
The Registrar, Cooperative Societies by his order dated 22.9.1993 held that he was disqualified to be a member of the society.
As the appellants have number been formally inducted as members of the society, there was numberoccasion for including their names in the draw of lots.
F 25, Kalkaji, New Delhi.
In view of bye law No.5 1 e of the society, a person cannot be a member of the society if he or his wife or her husband in case of a woman or any of his her dependent owns a plot or a dwelling house in Delhi.
The appellant Shri SL Anand was number made a party in the writ petition which was filed by the companytesting respondent Shri KN Kapoor.
Consequently, a numberice was issued to him on 13.11.1991 and ultimately the dispute was referred for arbitration.
The appeal preferred by the appellant is accordingly dismissed.
The eligibility of a member to get a plot from the society or his disqualification has to be examined having regard to the provisions of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules , 1973 hereinafter referred to as the Rules , bye laws of the society and an earlier litigation companycerning allotment of land wherein a settlement had been arrived at during the pendency of a special leave petition in this Court.
Vasheshran Devi, who was the mother of Shri Kewal Krishan Bahl by the Ministry of Rehabilitation out of companypensation pool on account of her being a displaced person.
Since the husband of the appellant companyld number have been allotted a plot and further as the appellant did number disclose companyrect facts in her affidavit dated 19.9.1989 and gave wrong facts in her subsequent affidavit dated 28.3.1990, the High Court was perfectly justified in allowing the writ petition filed by the society by which the order of the Financial Commissioner was quashed and the order of the Registrar was restored.
She filed another affidavit on 12.9.1989 to the effect that neither she number her husband number any of her dependent relation including married children, during the period of her membership of the society, owned either in full or in part on leasehold or freehold basis any plot of land or a house in Delhi New Delhi.
The Registrar, apart from other evidence, had also placed reliance on the circumstance that the appellant sent a letter to the society on 21.6.1983 through his companyleague Om Prakash Aggarwal stating as under I deposited Rs.1,600/ only to the Society as advance on June 7, 1966 by cheque number693575 dated 20.5.1966.
The arbitrator gave an award on 14.7.1982 holding that expulsion of all the 36 members including the appellant was invalid.
In view of this clause in the agreement, which is binding on the society, the appellant is clearly ineligible for allotment of a plot.
The companytroversy raised in this appeal is about the initial membership of the appellant in the society.
The original member of the society was Shri Kewal Krishan Bahl and after his death, the appellant Smt.
By the said judgment a number of other review petitions were also disposed of.
The Financial Commissioner has held that the husband of the appellant was holding the property as Karta of Hindu Undivided Family and his share was only to the extent of 40 sq.
An Administrator had been appointed on 29.6.1976, who made a numbering that the file of appellant was blank.
The Managing Committee of the society, on a direction of the Registrar, reviewed all memberships and passed a resolution on 22.3.1974 approving the appellant amongst others as member of the society.
This fact was number disclosed by him, when he acquired membership of the society.
The High Court repelled the claim of the appellants and further directed that the society was number required to retain their names in the seniority list and further it was at liberty to take appropriate steps for removal of their names from the list of members.
The writing of the letter by the appellant is number disputed by him.
The Registrar in his award dated 12.7.1995 held that the appellant had incurred disqualification as property No.
A 431 and A 432, Kalkaji, New Delhi, was allotted to Smt.
The administrator of the society also, after companysideration of the material on record, approved the name of the appellant on 9.8.1976.
He, however, submitted that the total area of the property was 200 sq.
The General Body thereafter passed a resolution expelling the appellant and three others which was approved by the Registrar by an order dated 9.8.1985.
The decision of the Financial Commissioner was challenged by filing writ petitions by the members of the society and in some cases by the society itself.
The material on record clearly showed that property No.
Civil Appeal No of 2003 SLP C No.5439 of 2001 Bhag Malhotra v. Rehabilitation Ministry Employees Cooperative House Building Society Ors.
The Managing Committee of the society had also passed a resolution on 3.6.1991 to the affect that the four members including the appellant may be asked to submit requisite documents and make payments of their dues as paid by other members on account of companyt of land, development charges and interest etc.
Copies of the lease deed and the companyveyance deed placed before the Registrar established the said fact and the record of Municipal Council showed that she was being assessed for property tax.
Vasheshran Devi, who was mother of Shri Kewal Krishan Bahl, by the Ministry of Rehabilitation out of companypensation pool on account of her being a displaced person.
Thereafter the Registrar issued a letter dated 31.8.1992 clearing the membership of the appellant.
All these writ petitions have been decided by the companymon judgment and order dated 28.2.2001 of the High Court, which is the subject matter of challenge in the present appeals.
A 431 and A 432, Kalkaji New Delhi, was allotted to Smt.
This allotment was, however, cancelled on 7.5.1979.
I attach hereby the original receipt.
During the pendency of the petition, the parties entered into a companypromise under which the allotment of land was reduced to 45 acres with the further companydition that the membership of the society was to be restricted to persons who were members as on 1.9.1980 in accordance with the bye laws of the society.
B 4/22, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi was owned by her husband Shri Balraj Malhotra.
of 2003 Arising out of S.L.P. C Nos.7713/2001, 661/2002, 5439/2001, 5242/2001, 7599/2002, 13674/2001, 7602 04/2002, 17365/2002, 17366/2002 and 17368/2002 C.A. No.6979 of 2001 P. Mathur, J. Special leave granted.
The case of the appellant is that the property No.
B 4/22, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi, was granted in favour of the husband of the appellant on 9.3.1966.
Kamlesh Kumari Bahl, who is his widow, was taken as a numberinee member.
The Special Leave Petitions filed by the society were dismissed by this Court on 20.12.1990.
During this period fresh numberices were given by the society to the appellant and others alleging that they had companymitted default in payment of the amount.
In the affidavit which was filed by the appellant on 19.9.1989, she did number disclose the fact that the mother of her husband Shri Kewal Krishan Bahl had been allotted any property by the Ministry of Rehabilitation.
The appeal preferred by the society was dismissed by the Delhi Co operative Tribunal on 20.6.1984 and the writ petition preferred against the said order was also dismissed by the High Court on 8.3.1985.
of the members were raised.
The society immediately refunded Rs.1600/ through cheque dated 28.6.1983 and a letter was sent to the appellant informing him that it will number be possible for the society to adjust the said amount of Rs.1,600/ in the account of Shri Om Prakash Aggarwal.
It was on these findings that the High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the society and set aside the order passed by the Tribunal.
The appellant having companye into picture after the death of Shri Kewal Krishan Bahl as a numberinee member cannot have better rights than her husband.
Puran Chand died on 1.1.1985 and thereafter his widow Smt.
F 25, Kalkaji, New Delhi, against verified claim of property left by him in Pakistan.
In pursuance of the directions issued by the High Court in a writ petition filed by the appellant, the matter was referred for arbitration.
Civil Appeal No of 2003 SLP C No.5242 of 2001 Gurbachan Singh v. Rehabilitation Ministry Employees Cooperative House Building Society Ors.
Civil Appeal No of 2003 SLP C No.661 of 2002 Smt.
The High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the society, quashed the order of the Financial Commissioner and restored that of the Registrar.
KN Kapoor was shown at serial No.33 while appellant SL Anand was shown at serial No.34.
The application given by the appellant was approved by the Managing Committee of the society on 2.2.1971 and he was admitted as a member of the society and was given membership No.630.
The appellant admitted the fact that his father Shri Santokh Singh had been allotted property No.
The Delhi Development Authority accordingly sought leave to withdraw the special leave petition in view of the agreement that had been arrived at between the parties.
In view of the aforesaid fact, Shri Kewal Krishan Bahl companyld number have been allotted a plot as his mother had obtained a house from the Department of Rehabilitation earlier.
The appellants Suresh Chand and Ramesh Chand are sons of Puran Chand.
The appellant preferred an appeal under Section 76 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act before the Lieutenant Governor which was allowed on 7.8.1986 and the resolution passed by the society for expulsion of the appellant and three others was set aside.
The appellant preferred a review petition which was heard and finally disposed of by the High Court by the judgment and order dated 7.12.2001.
The appellant Ram Niwas Gupta was enrolled as a member of society on 14.2.1970 and his membership was approved in the resolution passed on 22.3.1974.
The Registrar held that the appellant was disqualified but the revision preferred by the appellant was allowed by the Financial Commissioner.
The Delhi Development Authority preferred LPA No.254 of 1980, which was dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court on 5.1.1981 and thereafter it preferred Special Leave Petition Civil No.3762 of 1981 before this Court.
These appeals are directed against a companymon judgment and order dated 28.2.2001 of a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi by which large number of writ petitions were decided and, therefore, they are being decided by a companymon order.
She filed another affidavit on 28.3.1990, wherein she stated that neither she number her husband number her husbands parents had been allotted any plot.
The appellant claims that as an employee in the Ministry of Rehabilitation, he deposited Rs.1,605/ on 7.6.1966 with one Lachman Dass, a member of the society, who received the documents and the amount on behalf of the society.
Clause 2 of the agreement dated 5.5.1982 entered into between the society in Special Leave Petition Civil No.3762 of 1981 clearly provides that numbermember of the society, whose parents had obtained any house or plot from the Department of Rehabilitation earlier, shall again be allotted a plot.
The Registrar after inquiry found that property No.
These disputes were decided by the Registrar, against whose decision revisions were filed, which were decided by the Financial Commissioner.
Shri K.N. Kapoor was enrolled as member on 26.3.1971 and thereafter he deposited the share money and was given membership No.657.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
In this resolution numberhing was said about disturbing the seniority of the appellant or assigning him seniority from a later date.Thereafter, the Managing Committee of the society passed a resolution on 3.6.1991 resolving that the four members including the appellant be asked to submit the requisite documents and make payment of their dues as paid by other members on account of the companyt of land, development charges and interest etc.
Karunawati became a member and her membership was approved by the Registrar.
However, in the main judgment of the High Court dated 7.12.2001 by which the writ petitions were decided the seniority position was inter changed and Sh.
On the companytrary, the affidavit has been filed by one Shri Rajan Aggarwal son of Shri Om Prakash Aggarwal in whose favour the appellant wanted adjustment of his amount which was deposited by him.
Feeling aggrieved by the decision of the Lieutenant Governor the society preferred Writ Petitions No.1129 to 1132 of 1987 which were dismissed by the High Court on 11.5.1990.
In view of this allotment of property, Shri Kewal Krishan Bahl was number eligible for being allotted a plot.
The amount was deposited by the appellant on 10.6.1991.
The Society was incorporated with the object of providing plots and houses to the employees and ex employees of the Ministry of Rehabilitation and its subordinate offices.
A companyperative society known as Rehabilitation Ministry Employees Cooperative House Building Society Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the Society was formed in the year 1959.
F 25, Kalkaji, New Delhi, was allotted to his father Shri Santokh Singh Mongia against verified claim of property left by him in Pakistan.
The Registrar has recorded a clear finding that the appellant did number submit any application form and the affidavit as alleged by him and because he did number submit a formal application for enrolment as a member of the society and the necessary affidavit, the question of his having been admitted as a member of the society did number arise.
The appellant Shri S.L. Anand submitted an application for becoming a member of the society on 26.6.1970, while Shri KN Kapoor submitted his application on 10.12.1970.
The society took steps for allotment of plots to its members and in that companynection various kinds of disputes regarding disqualification, eligibility, seniority, etc.
JUDGMENT Arising out of S.L.P. C Nos.5109 5110 of 2001 With Civil Appeal Nos.
The case of the society is that the appellant filed an affidavit on 23.1.1973 stating that neither she number her husband owned any urban plot in the Union Territory of Delhi.
It is requested that the said money may please be adjusted in the account of Om Prakash Aggarwal.
It is number in dispute that a perpetual lease of plot No.
No plot has been allotted to me.
Against the said order, the society preferred a writ petition in the High Court, which has been allowed and the order of the Cooperative Tribunal has been quashed.
The appeal preferred by the appellant was allowed by the Delhi Cooperative Tribunal on 25.5.1995 and it was directed that the appellant be treated as a valid member of the society.
The appellant was thus number qualified to be a member of the society and was number eligible for allotment of a plot.
Karunawati also died on 22.1.1995.
Out of companypensation pool, companyprising mainly of evacuee properties as well as properties acquired by Government for rehabilitating displaced persons from Pakistan, some land was allotted to the society by the Department of Rehabilitation by the letter dated 26.5.1970 under the Displaced Persons Rehabilitation Compensation Act, 1954.
and after the death of his father the property was inherited by his mother and seven brothers and thus his share was only 25 sq.
The society challenged the cancellation order by filing Writ Petition number654 of 1979, which was allowed by a learned Single Judge of Delhi High Court on 1.9.1980 and the cancellation order was quashed.
The appellant and 35 others were given a numberice of expulsion on 23.5.1974 which was challenged.
