Court Must Conduct Inquiry on Mental Competency Before Appointing Legal Guardian - Punjab and Haryana High Court Right to Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Due to the Sentiments of Society: Kerala High Court Grants Bail in Eve Teasing Case Supreme Court Extends Probation to 70-Year-Old in Decades-Old Family Feud Case Authorized Railway Agents Cannot Be Criminally Prosecuted for Unauthorized Procurement And Supply Of Railway Tickets: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Arbitrarily: Supreme Court Upholds Rights of Accused For Valid Arbitration Agreement and Party Consent Necessary: Supreme Court Declares Ex-Parte Arbitration Awards Null and Void NDPS | Lack of Homogeneous Mixing, Inventory Preparation, and Magistrate Certification Fatal to Prosecution's Case: Punjab & Haryana High Court "May Means May, and Shall Means Shall": Supreme Court Clarifies Appellate Court's Discretion Under Section 148 of NI Act Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Re-Evaluation of Coal Block Tender, Cites Concerns Over Arbitrary Disqualification Dying Declarations Must Be Beyond Doubt to Sustain Convictions: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Burn Injury Murder Case No Legally Enforceable Debt Proven: Madras High Court Dismisses Petition for Special Leave to Appeal in Cheque Bounce Case Decisional Autonomy is a Core Part of the Right to Privacy : Kerala High Court Upholds LGBTQ+ Rights in Landmark Habeas Corpus Case Consent of a Minor Is No Defense Under the POCSO Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Well-Known Marks Demand Special Protection: Delhi HC Cancels Conflicting Trademark for RPG Industrial Products High Court Acquits Accused Due to ‘Golden Thread’ Principle: Gaps in Medical Evidence and Unexplained Time Frame Prove Decisive Supreme Court Dissolves Marriage Citing Irretrievable Breakdown; Awards ₹12 Crore Permanent Alimony Cruelty Need Not Be Physical: Mental Agony and Emotional Distress Are Sufficient Grounds for Divorce: Supreme Court Section 195 Cr.P.C. | Tribunals Are Not Courts: Private Complaints for Offences Like False Evidence Valid: Supreme Court Limitation | Right to Appeal Is Fundamental, Especially When Liberty Is at Stake: Supreme Court Condones 1637-Day Delay FIR Quashed | No Mens Rea, No Crime: Supreme Court Emphasizes Protection of Public Servants Acting in Good Faith Trademark | Passing Off Rights Trump Registration Rights: Delhi High Court A Minor Procedural Delay Should Not Disqualify Advances as Export Credit When Exports Are Fulfilled on Time: Bombay HC Preventive Detention Must Be Based on Relevant and Proximate Material: J&K High Court Terrorism Stems From Hateful Thoughts, Not Physical Abilities: Madhya Pradesh High Court Denies Bail of Alleged ISIS Conspiracy Forwarding Offensive Content Equals Liability: Madras High Court Upholds Conviction for Derogatory Social Media Post Against Women Journalists Investigation by Trap Leader Prejudiced the Case: Rajasthan High Court Quashes Conviction in PC Case VAT | Notice Issued Beyond Limitation Period Cannot Reopen Assessment: Kerala High Court Fishing Inquiry Not Permissible Under Section 91, Cr.P.C.: High Court Quashes Trial Court’s Order Directing CBI to Produce Unrelied Statements and Case Diary Vague and Omnibus Allegations Cannot Sustain Criminal Prosecution in Matrimonial Disputes: Calcutta High Court High Court Emphasizes Assessee’s Burden of Proof in Unexplained Cash Deposits Case Effective, efficient, and expeditious alternative remedies have been provided by the statute: High Court Dismisses Petition for New Commercial Electricity Connection Maintenance Must Reflect Financial Realities and Social Standards: Madhya Pradesh High Court Upholds Interim Maintenance in Domestic Violence Land Classified as Agricultural Not Automatically Exempt from SARFAESI Proceedings: High Court Permissive Use Cannot Ripen into Right of Prescriptive Easement: Kerala High Court High Court Slams Procedural Delays, Orders FSL Report in Assault Case to Prevent Miscarriage of Justice Petitioner Did Not Endorse Part-Payments on Cheque; Section 138 NI Act Not Attracted: Madras High Court Minority Christian Schools Not Bound by Rules of 2018; Disciplinary Proceedings Can Continue: High Court of Calcutta Lack of Independent Witnesses Undermines Prosecution: Madras High Court Reaffirms Acquittal in SCST Case Proceedings Before Tribunal Are Summary in Nature and It Need Not Be Conducted Like Civil Suits: Kerala High Court Affirms Award in Accident Claim Affidavit Not Sufficient to Transfer Title Punjab and Haryana High Court

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

 

Similar News