High Court of Judicature at Bombay Admits Appeals from City Civil Court Order in Membership Cancellation Dispute. Decision Involves Interpretation of Club Regulations and Articles of Association Regarding Eligibility of Founder Members' Kin.

Case Note & Summary

The appeals arose from a common judgment dated February 22, 2006, passed by the City Civil Court, Mumbai in S.C. Suit No. 5154 of 2005, where the original plaintiffs (respondent Nos. 1 to 3 herein) had filed two Notice of Motions seeking interim injunctions against the defendant club and associated entities. The plaintiff No. 1 was admitted as a Founder Member of the defendant No. 1 club (Garware Club House) in August 1973, on the recommendation of defendant No. 3 club, which was affiliated to defendant No. 4 Association. At the time of his admission, the club's regulations, adopted originally in August 1971 and amended in 1973 and 1974, provided that clubs affiliated to the association prior to September 30, 1968 could recommend up to six persons as members, with three designated as Founder Members who paid full entrance fee. Plaintiff Nos. 2 and 3, the sons of plaintiff No. 1, applied for ordinary membership under a provision that allowed sons and daughters of members of over eight years' standing to be enrolled at 50% of the entrance fee. Their applications were accepted, and they were placed on a permanent wait list in the year 2000, permitted to use club facilities pending availability of regular membership, on payment of annual subscription and an advance deposit. In July 2005, the club communicated to plaintiff Nos. 2 and 3 that as per the Articles of Association, sons and daughters of Founder Members were not eligible for ordinary membership, cancelled their wait list allotments, and requested return of their identity cards. The plaintiff No. 1 protested and sought discussion at the Annual General Meeting, but the matter was not properly taken up. Subsequently, by a communication dated November 11, 2005, defendant No. 3 club withdrew the nomination of four founder members, including plaintiff No. 1. Acting on this, the Managing Committee of defendant No. 1, in its meeting on November 14, 2005, resolved to withdraw the founder membership of those four individuals. The plaintiffs then filed Suit No. 5154 of 2005 in the City Civil Court seeking declarations that the decisions dated July 27, 2005, October 27, 2005, November 14, 2005, and the letter of November 11, 2005, were illegal, malafide, and contrary to the Articles of Association. Pending the suit, they took out Notice of Motion No. 4439 of 2005 for an injunction restraining the defendants from implementing those decisions. During the hearing, it emerged that the decision to remove plaintiff No. 1 had been communicated, and the plaintiffs amended their pleadings to seek further reliefs. The trial court passed a common order on the two Notice of Motions, which apparently granted interim protection, prompting the defendants (the club and certain entities) to file the present appeals. The High Court admitted the appeals, waived service, and, with the consent of all parties, proceeded to hear them finally given the urgency. The judgment text available up to paragraph 10 details the factual background and pleadings but does not include the court's analysis, findings, or the final decision on the appeals.

Issue of Consideration