ADV BABASAHEB WASADE & ORS versus MANOHAR GANGADHAR MUDDESHWAR & ORS

ADV BABASAHEB WASADE & ORS versus MANOHAR GANGADHAR MUDDESHWAR & ORS

Because the Working President had been validly designated by an earlier Executive Body resolution and, in the absence of President, Secretary and other office-bearers, convening the meeting at the written request of 16 surviving members was a necessity; further, under the proviso to Section 15 of the Societies Registration Act the seven defaulting objectors were disentitled to vote and to be counted as members and therefore not entitled to notice, the election of 08.09.2002 was not vitiated, the Change Report No.668 of 2002 is to be accepted, but fresh elections are directed to resolve outstanding membership issues

Parties
Appellants: Adv Babasaheb Wasade & Ors.; Respondents: Manohar Gangadhar Muddeshwar & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
23 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / On Appeal From the Judgment and Order Dated 20.07.2017 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench (first Appeal No.811 of 2016)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Membership and Voting Rights Under Societies Law, Notice for Meetings, Validity of Society Elections and Change Reports, Application of Doctrine of Necessity, Locus to Challenge Charity Commissioner Orders, Interpretation of Bye Laws
Societies Registration Act, 1860 Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 Charity/trust Law Administrative Law Membership and Voting Rights Under Societies Law Notice for Meetings Validity of Society Elections and Change Reports Application of Doctrine of Necessity +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adv Babasaheb Wasade & Ors.

Appellants

Manohar Gangadhar Muddeshwar & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / On Appeal From the Judgment and Order Dated 20.07.2017 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench (first Appeal No.811 of 2016)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Working President could convene the election meeting of 08.09.2002 under the bye-laws
  2. 2 Whether seven objectors were entitled to notice for the meeting of 08.09.2002 given disqualification under Section 15 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860
  3. 3 Whether lack of notice to those seven objectors vitiated the election meeting of 08.09.2002

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Working President had been validly designated by an earlier Executive Body resolution and, in the absence of President, Secretary and other office-bearers, convening the meeting at the written request of 16 surviving members was a necessity; further, under the proviso to Section 15 of the Societies Registration Act the seven defaulting objectors were disentitled to vote and to be counted as members and therefore not entitled to notice, the election of 08.09.2002 was not vitiated, the Change Report No.668 of 2002 is to be accepted, but fresh elections are directed to resolve outstanding membership issues

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order of the High Court dated 20.07.2017 set aside
  • Change Report No.668 of 2002 accepted