Renewal Is Not Extension Unless Terms Are Fixed in Same Deed: Bombay High Court Strikes Down ₹64.75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand on Nine-Year Lease Fraud Vitiates All Solemn Acts—Appointment Void Ab Initio Even After 27 Years: Allahabad High Court Litigants Cannot Be Penalised For Attending Criminal Proceedings Listed On Same Day: Delhi High Court Restores Civil Suit Dismissed For Default Limited Permissive Use Confers No Right to Expand Trademark Beyond Agreed Territories: Bombay High Court Enforces Consent Decree in ‘New Indian Express’ Trademark Dispute Assam Rifles Not Entitled to Parity with Indian Army Merely Due to Similar Duties: Delhi High Court Dismisses Equal Pay Petition Conspiracy Cannot Be Presumed from Illicit Relationship: Bombay High Court Acquits Wife, Affirms Conviction of Paramour in Murder Case Bail in NDPS Commercial Quantity Cases Cannot Be Granted Without Satisfying Twin Conditions of Section 37: Delhi High Court Cancels Bail Orders Terming Them ‘Perversely Illegal’ Article 21 Rights Not Absolute In Cases Threatening National Security: Supreme Court Sets Aside Bail Granted In Jnaneshwari Express Derailment Case A Computer Programme That Solves a Technical Problem Is Not Barred Under Section 3(k): Madras High Court Allows Patent for Software-Based Data Lineage System Premature Auction Without 30-Day Redemption Violates Section 176 and Bank’s Own Terms: Orissa High Court Quashes Canara Bank’s Gold Loan Sale Courts Can’t Stall Climate-Resilient Public Projects: Madras High Court Lifts Status Quo on Eco Park, Pond Works at Race Club Land No Cross-Examination, No Conviction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Penalty for Violating Principles of Natural Justice ITAT Was Wrong in Disregarding Statements Under Oath, But Additions Unsustainable Without Corroborative Evidence: Madras High Court Deduction Theory Under Old Land Acquisition Law Has No Place Under 2013 Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Compensation for Metro Land Acquisition UIT Cannot Turn Around After Issuing Pattas, It's Estopped Now: Rajasthan High Court Private Doctor’s Widow Eligible for COVID Insurance if Duty Proven: Supreme Court Rebukes Narrow Interpretation of COVID-Era Orders Smaller Benches Cannot Override Constitution Bench Authority Under The Guise Of Clarification: Supreme Court Criticises Judicial Indiscipline Public Premises Act, 1971 | PP Act Overrides State Rent Control Laws for All Tenancies; Suhas Pophale Overruled: Supreme Court Court Has No Power To Reduce Sentence Below Statutory Minimum Under NDPS Act: Supreme Court Denies Relief To Young Mother Convicted With 23.5 kg Ganja Non-Compliance With Section 52-A Is Not Per Se Fatal: Supreme Court Clarifies Law On Sampling Procedure Under NDPS Act MBA Degree Doesn’t Feed the Stomach: Delhi High Court Says Wife’s Qualification No Ground to Deny Maintenance

Supreme Court upholds expulsion of member from cooperative society due to default in payment of dues

03 September 2024 9:43 AM

By: Admin


On 29 March 2023, In a judgement Geeta & Ors. Vs. Financial Commissioner Govt. of NCT Delhi & Ors., Supreme Court upholds expulsion of member from cooperative society due to default in payment of dues and observed that the society had followed the prescribed procedure for cancellation of membership of the society due to the late husband of appellant no.1's default in payment of dues. The Financial Commissioner had dismissed the appeal of the late husband of appellant no.1, who had deposited only a part of the amount due and had declined to avail himself of the offer to pay the dues with interest within a reasonable period. The High Court had also recorded that the late husband of appellant no.1 was raising a dispute regarding the cost of construction, meaning that his default in payment of dues to the society remained unrebutted.

Appellant challenged the order passed by the Division Bench of Delhi High Court and against the order passed by the Financial Commissioner, Delhi, which had expelled the membership of the late husband of appellant no.1 on account of non-payment of dues for construction of flats and allotment thereof by the Nav Jagriti Cooperative Group Housing Society Limited. The High Court had upheld the order dated 23.3.1993 passed by the Joint Registrar (II), Cooperative Societies, Delhi, granting time to the expelled members to deposit dues by 30.04.1993 and in default, the resolution of the society was approved. Same is challenged in Apex Court.

Appellants argued that there was a prescribed procedure for cancellation of membership of the society under Rule 36 of the Delhi Cooperative Society Rules, 1973, which was not followed in the present case. The amount shown to be recoverable from the late husband of appellant no.1 was also disputed, as there was some enhancement of the cost of the flats, which was not proper.

On the other hand, the counsel for the respondents argued that there were concurrent findings of facts recorded by all the authorities, which upheld the default of the appellants in paying the dues of the society. An offer was also made to the late husband of appellant no.1 for payment of the balance dues, but it was not availed of, as he wanted to contest the litigation. It was also mentioned that at this stage, it was not possible to offer any flat to the appellants as they had failed to avail of the opportunity at the appropriate stage.

The Supreme Court observed that the society had followed the prescribed procedure for cancellation of membership of the society due to the late husband of appellant no.1's default in payment of dues. The Financial Commissioner had dismissed the appeal of the late husband of appellant no.1, who had deposited only a part of the amount due and had declined to avail himself of the offer to pay the dues with interest within a reasonable period. The High Court had also recorded that the late husband of appellant no.1 was raising a dispute regarding the cost of construction, meaning that his default in payment of dues to the society remained unrebutted.

The Supreme Court held that the only issue in the case was regarding the default of payment of dues of the society for construction of flats, which the late husband of appellant no.1 was not ready and willing to pay at any stage, despite opportunities given. The argument raised that there was a violation of Rule 36(2) of the Delhi Cooperative Society Rules, 1973 and the prescribed procedure for expulsion of a society member had not been followed, was not accepted by the Court. The Court further held that procedural law is subservient to justice. Appeal Dismissed.

Geeta & Ors. Vs. Financial Commissioner Govt. of NCT Delhi & Ors

 

Latest Legal News