http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: NADAR MAHAJAN SANGAM S. VELAICHAMYNADAR KALLOORI & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: DISTRICT REGISTRAR (SOCIETIES & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       07/04/1997

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, D.P. WADHWA

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      These appeals  by special leave arise from the judgment of the  Division Bench  of the  Madras High  Court, made  on January 9,  1997 in  CMA No.  843/96 and  WP Nos.  9771  and 12007/96.      N.M.S.S Vellaichamy  Nadar College  was established  by Nadar Mahajan  Sangam in  the year  1965 and election to the Society  which   runs  the  college,  is  the  bone  of  the contention.  Untrammeled   by  procedural  formats  and  its ramifications in  the process  of election, the heart of the matter is good management of the college. Who is entitled to run the  institution the college. Who is entitled to run the institution and  administer property of the said institution is the  crux of  the question.  It is  not in  dispute  that though the term of the previous Society Committee expired on March 31,  1966, elections  could not be held for one reason or  the  other.  As  a  consequence,  at  the  pain  of  the entrustment of the management to the third agency, elections came to  be held  on June  9, 1996,  which proved  to be  an abortive attempt.  Consequent thereon,  a complaint was made to the  Registrar in  Form No.7 on June 12, 1996. An enquiry appears to  have been  held by the Registrar which failed in the process  from legal  perspectives  but  the  report  was submitted on  June 19, 1996. In the meanwhile, OS No. 417/96 was filed  for perpetual  injunction. An  interim  mandatory injunction  was  issued  in  I.A.  No.292/96  directing  the District Registrar  appointed under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act,  1975 (for  short, the  ‘Act’) to find out factual position  and then  to submit  the report.  In   the meanwhile, writ  petitions came to be filed. Ultimately, the Division Bench came to the conclusion that the learned trial Judge had  abdicated  his  functioning  as  an  adjudicatory authority; he  should have  recorded the  evidence  and  the findings by  himself. Instead,  he directed the Registrar to conduct an  enquiry and, thereby, it is a case of abdication of judicial functioning. Accordingly, the impugned order was passed.      We have  heard learned  counsel for  both the  parties. With a  view to  shorten  the  litigation,  the  appropriate

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

course would be as under:      The civil Court is directed to appoint an Advocate as a Commissioner. The  Advocate-Commissioner would  take all the members of  the Society existing as on May 14, 1996 as valid members.  He   should  conduct   the  elections   afresh  in accordance with  the procedure prescribed under the bye-laws of the  Society. Till  the elections are held, the Principal shall continue  to hold  charge of  the  management  of  the institution and  will act  as Receiver  of the  Court  under Order XL,  Rule 1, CPC. He shall be answerable to the Court. On receipt of the report from the Advocate-Commissioner, the civil Court  shall pass  appropriate orders  in the light of the  report   thus  submitted   and  dispose   of  the  suit accordingly.  The  expenditure  incurred  and  fees  of  the Advocate-Commissioner should  be as  determined by the civil Court. Elections  are directed  to  be  conducted  within  a period of  six weeks from the date of the appointment of the Advocate-Commissioner by the trial Court. The trial Court is directed to  appoint the  Commissioner within two weeks from the date  of the  receipt of  the order.  The trial Court is directed to  dispose of  the suit, after the election report is submitted, within three months thereafter. The fee of the Advocate-Commissioner should  be  determined  by  the  trial Court. The  same shall  be born  by  the  successful  party. Initially, the  same may  be paid  by the Principal from the College funds  and later  recovered by  the College from the successful party to the suit.      The appeals are accordingly disposed of. No costs.