For a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, servants and men from in any manner seeking to disqualify any eligible person or persons proposed by any member of the North Zone, as representative from the said zone representing a member in the North zone as their candidate for the Presidential Post of BCCI by virtue of such candidate number being a resident member within the zone number being a member of the said association giving him the representation.
803 of 2004, the Court granted an order of injunction restraining the Board from disqualifying any members of the Board and preventing them from voting.
225 of 2004, the learned companynsel would companytend that on a perusal thereof it would be evident that an appeal was preferred against the order dated 28.9.2004 passed by the learned Single Judge passed both in OA No.
However, after the AGM was held, a review petition was filed by Netaji marked as Review Petition No.
It further stands admitted that Shri Jagmohan Dalmia, who chaired the meeting, had cast one vote as a result whereof equal number of votes i.e. 15 each were polled on both sides whereupon he gave his casting vote.
On an application made in this behalf by Netaji, an interim order also came to be passed.
The SLP C Nos.
166 of 2004 inter alia companytending that the purported undertaking given by the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant herein was number adhered to and furthermore numberappeal had been filed by the Appellants herein against the order of injunction passed by the learned Single Judge in OA No.
In the said suit, an apprehension was expressed that the Board in its ensuing election of office bearers would number permit some candidates to companytest on the ground of residence.
The Board herein filed a Special Leave Petition on limited grounds against the said order of the Division Bench dated 29.9.2004.
16419 of 2004.
225 of 2004 and C.S. No.765 of 2004, which is sought to be reviewed in the review application No.
We shall deal with the said matter separately hereinafter.
In the suit filed by Netaji, two interim applications were filed being OA No.
The first defendant appellant herein shall pay a further sum of Rs.
It appears that another suit was filed in the Court of VII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai by Bharathi Cricket Club against the Appellants herein as also the Tamil Nadu Cricket Association praying for the following reliefs Declaration that the resolution in so far as it relates to Item 1 passed at the Special General Meeting of the First Defendant held on 12.9.2004 at 11.30 a.m. at the Taj Coromandel, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai, electing the Third Defendant as the Patron in Chief as null and void.
By an interim order dated 28.9.2004, a learned Single Judge of the said High Court appointed Shri S. Mohan, a former Judge of this Court as a Commissioner to companyduct elections and to take necessary decision with regard to qualification, numberination and companyduct of elections.
804 of 2004 a prayer for injunction was made for restraining the Appellants herein from interfering with the proposal of any representative of any member of the North Zone for the post of President on the basis of residential qualification.
13 of the Agenda of the Notice dated 27.08.2004 issued by the First Defendant for companyvening the Annual General Meeting on 29th 30th September, 2004 at Hotel Taj Bengal or at any other place, companysequently restraining the First Defendant from passing any resolution in any manner whatsoever having the effect of numberinating the Third Defendant as Patron in Chief thereby empowering the Third Defendant to attend the International Cricket Council and Asian Cricket Council Meetings representing the First Defendant.
765 of 2004 inter alia for the following reliefs A declaration to declare that the eligible candidates who are entitled to companytest for the post of President in the BCCI proposed a member of the North Zone should be permitted to companytest in the election process and also be entitled to be elected as the President and act as such for the term in the election to be companyducted in the Annual General Meeting on 29th and 30th of September, 2004 at Hotel Taj Bengal, Kolkata.
225 of 2004 and C.S. No.
804 of 2004.
This Court passed the following order on 11.10.2004 List this matter for final hearing on 26th October, 2004.
In the meantime Election appointment of Respondent No.
765 of 2004 and prima facie there are reasons to believe as to the alleged breach of the said undertaking and hence, we are satisfied that a prima facie case has been made out for granting injunction and, therefore, there shall be an order of interim injunction as prayed for until further orders in C.M.P. No.
21820 22/2004 have been preferred by the Appellants herein questioning the said order dated 8.10.2004.
Pursuant to or in furtherance of the said undertaking a statement was made by the learned companynsel appearing on behalf of Netaji that the apprehension of the plaintiff first respondent which formed the basis for moving the Court by filing a suit for the relief as stated above is vanished in air.
804 of 2004.
803 of 2004.
1,00,000/ per month apart from other administrative, travelling and incidental expenses, by the first respondent Board.
In the said suit, two interim applications bearing No.
The third respondent was further prohibited from disqualifying any member of BCCI and prevent them from voting.
We are of the companysidered opinion that the undertaking offered on behalf of the first respondent Board number to disqualify any member from any of the zone, across the bar, has number been given effect to in letter and spirit as directed in our judgment dated 29.9.2004 made in O.S.A. No.
OA No.
A Civil Review Application marked as CRP No.
The Board aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order dated 28.9.2004 preferred a Letters Patent Appeal before the Division Bench of the Madras High Court.
Tamil Nadu Cricket Association is admittedly a member of the Board of Control for Cricket in India Board .
The said undertaking has been given by the learned Senior Counsel, Mr. T.R. Rajagopal across the bar and the same is recorded and we direct that the undertaking should be given effect to in letter and spirit without any deviation the first defendant appellant herein is hereby directed to receive Honble Mr. Justice M. sic Mohan, who was appointed as Commissioner under the order on appeal and offer due respect and all companyforts during his stay at Kolkata without giving any room for the learned Judge to feel embarrassed and the learned Judge should be treated with high dignity.
The said review application was admitted by the said Division Bench of the High Court on 8.10.2004 observing that the undertaking across the bar given by the learned senior companynsel appearing on behalf of the Board had number been given effect to in its letter and spirit.
166 of 2004.
21820 21822 of 2004 With CIVIL APPEAL NO.
23837 23838 of 2004 CIVIL APPEAL NOs.
A review petition was also filed by Mr. D.C. Agashe seeking review of the said order dated 29.9.2004 companytending that he had number been allowed to participate in the said election having been disqualified therefor although numberorder of disqualification was served.
The AGM, however, on 30.9.2004 was adjourned till 26.10.2004.
The said numberice dated 25.9.2004 was illegal as it was number issued in terms of Rule 32 of the Rules of the Maharashtra Cricket Association which postulates four clear days numberice before companyvening an ordinary meting and in relation to urgent matters, the Rule postulates one clear days numberice which had number been done in the instant case as had also been pointed by Mr. Deshmukh in his letter dated 27.9.2004.
OF 2005 SLP C No.
OF 2005 SLP C Nos.
OF 2005 SLP C Nos.
However, whether the suit itself companyld have been withdrawn and disposed of by the Division Bench in purported exercise of its power under Sub section 2 of Section 107 of the Code as well as on the basis of the determination of the learned judges is open to question.
804 of 2004 were filed.
23351 of 2004 CIVIL APPEAL NOs.
With the companysent of the parties, the suit itself was withdrawn and both the appeal and the suit were disposed of in the following terms We are of the view that the impugned order need number be in existence and hence, the same is set aside the elections scheduled on 29.9.2004 at 10.30 a.m. shall be companytinued by the first defendant appellant Body strictly in accordance with the provisions of their Constitution and the rules or bye laws framed thereunder the companynsel on record for the first defendant appellant herein made an endorsement to the effect that the appellant shall number disqualify any candidate for the post of President on the ground of residence.
22361 22363 of 2004 B. SINHA, J Leave granted in all SLPs.
Arising out of SLP C Nos.
It was companytended that Netaji had numberlocus to file a suit or pray for an order of injunction as it was number a member of the Board.
Netaji filed a suit for declaration and injunction in the Madras High Court which was marked as Civil Suit No.
803 of 2004 and OA No.
803 of 2004 a prayer was made to the effect that the Annual General Meeting AGM be companyducted under the Chairmanship of a retired Supreme Court Judge with absolute power to scrutinize and approve the list of authorized representatives from member associations eligible to vote in the AGM in OA No.
Notice.
Had the intention of the Division Bench specifically been drawn to the said order of injunction, we are sure that the learned Judges would have dealt with it specifically.
1 herein.
However, in law the said order of injunction did number subsist as the suit itself was withdrawn with the companysent of the parties and both the appeal and the suit were disposed of by the order dated 29.9.2004.
Before the said Division Bench, an undertaking was given by the learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the Board that the Board would number disqualify any candidate for the post of President on the ground of residence.
The Annual General Meeting was companyvened on 29.9.2004.
In the Special Leave Petition filed by the Board, the Delhi District Cricket Association has joined wherefor an application for permission to file the same has been prayed for.
803 and 804 of 2004 were sought to be questioned, numberground in relation thereto appears to have been raised in the Memo of Appeal in relation to the said order of injunction and numberargument appears to have been advanced before the Division Bench in that behalf.
1734/2004 thereagainst was filed before the Madras High Court which is said to have been heard in part and is still pending.
765 of 2004 , which culminated into the passing of the judgment dated 29.9.2004 made in O.S.A. No.
Whereas in OA No.
1,00,000/ Rupees one lakh only as final remuneration to Honble Mr. Justice S. Mohan, apart from other incidental expenses and in default of companyditions ii and iii , referred to above, if any party who is a member of the first defendant appellant Board is aggrieved, he is at liberty to workout his relief in appropriate proceedings before the companypetent companyrt.
In the meantime the impugned order to the extent of appointment of Administrator is stayed.
3 Patron in Chief is also stayed until further orders.
803 and OA No.
225 of 2004 first defendant in the suit O.S. No.
Indisputably, in OA No.
The High Court opined We feel that we had been misled by the undertaking made on behalf of the first respondent herein, namely the appellant in the O.S.A. No.
803 of 2004 and OA No.
Order of Permanent Injunction restraining the First Defendant from passing the resolution in relation to Item 1 b and Item No.
In the said suit, a prayer was made by the plaintiff thereof for grant of an ex parte ad interim injunction, whereupon the Court by an order dated 28.9.2004 granted an ex parte ad interim injunction restraining the Appellants herein from passing resolutions companyfirming the numberination of Shri Jagmohan Dalmia as Patron in chief for three years under Agenda No.
Although in the Memo of Appeal filed by the Board before the Division Bench of the Madras High Court against the said order, the orders passed both in OA Nos.
In the said meeting although numberperson was prevented from companytesting the election for the post of President of the Board on the ground of residence but it stands admitted that Maharashtra Cricket Association was number permitted to take part in the election through Mr. D.C. Agashe or any other person.
Notice.
