Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Royal Manor Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated 27 August 2015 passed by the Co-operative Appellate Court, which dismissed the society's appeal against an interim order dated 29 October 2014 passed by the Co-operative Court No. II, Mumbai. The Co-operative Court had granted a mandatory interim injunction in favour of respondent nos.1 and 2, Angana Bharali Das and Romit Rajan Das, directing the society to admit them as members and provide them with amenities. The respondents had purchased flats from the developer, M/s. Lalani Construction Pvt. Ltd., between 2000 and 2004. The society refused to admit them as members, leading to a dispute. The Co-operative Court found that the respondents had a prima facie case, balance of convenience in their favour, and would suffer irreparable loss if the injunction was not granted. The Appellate Court confirmed this order. The society argued that the respondents were not entitled to membership as they had not complied with the society's bye-laws. The High Court, after hearing the parties, held that the findings of the lower courts were not perverse and that the society had acted arbitrarily. The court dismissed the petition, upholding the mandatory injunction. The court noted that the society's bye-laws provided for membership upon purchase of a flat and that the society had not followed its own bye-laws or principles of natural justice. The court also observed that the respondents had paid for the flats and were in possession, and denying them membership would cause irreparable harm. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Co-operative Law - Membership Rights - Mandatory Injunction - Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, Bye-laws - The court considered whether a mandatory interim injunction could be granted directing a co-operative housing society to admit purchasers of flats as members. The court held that where the society's bye-laws provide for membership upon purchase of a flat and the society has not followed its own bye-laws or principles of natural justice in refusing membership, a mandatory injunction can be granted to protect the rights of the purchasers pending final disposal. (Paras 1-10) B) Civil Procedure - Interim Injunction - Mandatory Injunction - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 - The court examined the principles for granting a mandatory injunction at an interim stage. It held that a mandatory injunction can be granted if the case is clear and the balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant, especially where the refusal would cause irreparable injury. The court found that the respondents had a strong prima facie case and that the society's conduct in denying membership was arbitrary. (Paras 5-8) C) Constitutional Law - Article 227 - Supervisory Jurisdiction - The court exercised its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to examine the legality of the orders passed by the Co-operative Court and the Appellate Court. It held that the findings of fact by the lower courts were not perverse and did not warrant interference under Article 227. (Paras 9-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Co-operative Appellate Court was justified in confirming the mandatory interim injunction directing the petitioner-society to admit the respondent nos.1 and 2 as members and to provide them with amenities, pending final adjudication of the dispute.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the orders of the Co-operative Court and the Co-operative Appellate Court. The court held that the findings of the lower courts were not perverse and that the society had acted arbitrarily in denying membership. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Mandatory injunction
- Co-operative society
- Membership rights
- Bye-laws
- Natural justice
- Prima facie case
- Balance of convenience
- Irreparable loss
