Case Note & Summary
The case involves a rather unusual circumstance where the director of the Petitioner-company has sued himself in connection with proceedings for de-registration of a cooperative housing society. The director, Dr. Satish Kumar Sharma, wears two hats: in his individual capacity, he is a member of the society on the strength of ownership of a garage and has also functioned as society's office bearer; but in his capacity as director of the company, he seeks de-registration of the society inter alia on the ground that a garage occupier cannot be society's member. The director thus purchased a garage, secured membership of the society, and now claims that garage owners cannot become members of the society and on that count seeks de-registration of the society. His company is aggrieved by rejection of application for de-registration of the society. He has accordingly affirmed the present Petition on behalf of his company for challenging the order rejecting de-registration of the Society in which he has impleaded himself as Respondent No. 11. The issues arise in the light of a challenge mounted by the Petitioner to the Order dated 6 May 2026 passed by the Hon'ble Minister (Co-operation) allowing Appeal No. 160 of 2025 filed by Respondent No.1-Society and setting aside the order dated 3 September 2024 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar. By order dated 3 September 2024, the Divisional Joint Registrar had allowed the application preferred by the Petitioner and had set aside Certificate of Registration dated 23 March 1981 in respect of Respondent No.1-Society and had appointed an Official Assignee for completion of the necessary legal process. The court considered the issue whether de-registration of a society can be ordered by the Registrar by taking into consideration events that have occurred after society's registration, and whether factors such as existence of title disputes, allegations of unauthorised construction of society's building, rejection of application of society for deemed conveyance, etc. are germane for seeking de-registration of a society formed 45 years ago. Also involved is the issue whether de-registration proceedings can be permitted to be used for the purpose of safeguarding title in the land. The court held that de-registration cannot be ordered based on post-registration events and that such proceedings cannot be used for safeguarding title in the land. The court dismissed the petition.
Headnote
A) Co-operative Societies - De-registration - Post-registration events - Section 22 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - The court considered whether de-registration of a society can be ordered based on events occurring after registration. Held that de-registration cannot be ordered by taking into consideration events that have occurred after society's registration. (Paras 2, 3) B) Co-operative Societies - De-registration - Title disputes - Section 22 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - The court examined whether factors such as existence of title disputes, allegations of unauthorised construction, rejection of application for deemed conveyance are germane for seeking de-registration of a society formed 45 years ago. Held that such factors are not germane for de-registration. (Paras 2, 3) C) Co-operative Societies - De-registration - Safeguarding title - Section 22 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - The court considered whether de-registration proceedings can be permitted to be used for the purpose of safeguarding title in the land. Held that de-registration proceedings cannot be used for safeguarding title in the land. (Paras 2, 3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether de-registration of a society can be ordered by the Registrar by taking into consideration events that have occurred after society's registration; whether factors such as existence of title disputes, allegations of unauthorised construction, rejection of application for deemed conveyance are germane for seeking de-registration of a society formed 45 years ago; whether de-registration proceedings can be permitted to be used for the purpose of safeguarding title in the land.
Final Decision
The court dismissed the petition, upholding the order of the Minister (Co-operation) dated 6 May 2026.
Law Points
- De-registration of society cannot be based on post-registration events
- De-registration proceedings cannot be used for safeguarding title in land
- Scope of Section 22 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act
- 1960
