Case Note & Summary
The litigation arose from a claim for allotment of a plot in M/s Burmah Shell Co-operative Housing Society. The original claimant, Mr. S.N. Sharma, claimed to be a member of the Society and sought allotment, alleging illegal deprivation. After his death, his legal heir pursued the dispute. The matter was filed before the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Delhi, and referred to an Arbitrator. The Society questioned the Arbitrator's appointment by filing a civil suit. Despite a restraint order, the Arbitrator proceeded ex parte and passed an award upholding the claim. The legal heir approached the Supreme Court, which by judgment dated 21.08.2002 in Prakash Narain Sharma v. Burmah Shell Co-operative Housing Society Ltd, 2002 INSC 345, set aside the ex parte award and directed continuation of arbitration from the stage the Society was set ex parte. The original Arbitrator having expired, the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Delhi, was appointed as the new Arbitrator. On 07.10.2003, the Registrar passed an award holding that the original claimant was a member of the Society, had performed his obligations, and was entitled to allotment of a plot. The award directed the Managing Committee of the Society to give a plot to the legal heir upon full payment of land cost. The Society appealed under Section 76 of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 1972. The Delhi Co-operative Tribunal, by order dated 18.03.2004, dismissed the appeal and upheld the Registrar's order. Aggrieved, the Society filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution before the Delhi High Court. The High Court, by judgment dated 06.10.2010, found that neither the Registrar nor the Tribunal had considered relevant material on record. The High Court held that the original claimant had never been admitted as a member in 1952; he had resigned from membership in 1951; and there were four members with prior claims who would be bypassed by the allotment. Consequently, the High Court set aside the orders of the Registrar and the Tribunal and allowed the writ petition. The legal heir of the original claimant filed the present civil appeals before the Supreme Court challenging the High Court judgment. The appellant argued that the High Court exceeded its writ jurisdiction and that all relevant aspects, including continuous membership and availability of land, had been considered. The respondent supported the High Court judgment, contending that the authorities below ignored crucial documentary evidence showing cessation of membership and prior claims of other members. The Supreme Court heard arguments and perused records, but the provided judgment text ends mid-sentence in paragraph 7 without disclosing the final decision or operative directions.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Supervisory Jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 - Constitution of India, Articles 226-227 - The High Court set aside orders of the Registrar and Delhi Co-operative Tribunal after finding that the authorities ignored relevant documentary material showing the original claimant ceased membership in 1951 and that other members had prior claims - Held that interference in writ jurisdiction is justified where relevant material is ignored causing miscarriage of justice (Paras 4-6). B) Co-operative Societies - Membership and Allotment - Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 1972, Sections 61, 72, 76 - The dispute concerned whether the original claimant was a member of the housing society and entitled to plot allotment - The High Court found the claimant was never admitted as a member in 1952 and had resigned in 1951; no share certificate was issued; allotment would bypass four senior members - Held that the original claimant was not entitled to allotment of any plot (Paras 3-4). C) Arbitration - Award Challenge - Setting Aside of Arbitral Award - Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 1972, Sections 61, 76 - An ex parte award was set aside by the Supreme Court in 2002 and remanded; on remand the Registrar passed an award which was upheld by the Tribunal but set aside by the High Court - Held that the High Court can intervene to correct errors where relevant material is ignored under Articles 226 and 227 (Paras 2-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution in setting aside the concurrent orders of the Arbitrator/Registrar and the Delhi Co-operative Tribunal; whether the original claimant was a member of the Society and entitled to allotment of a plot; whether relevant documentary material was ignored by the Registrar and the Tribunal.
Final Decision
The provided judgment text is truncated before the Supreme Court's final decision; therefore, the final decision is not mentioned.
Law Points
- High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution can interfere with concurrent orders of statutory authorities if relevant material is ignored causing miscarriage of justice
- membership of co-operative society requires admission and share certificate
- prior claims of senior members must be considered before allotment
- arbitrator under Section 61 of Delhi Co-operative Societies Act
- 1972 has jurisdiction to decide membership disputes
- appeal under Section 76 of Delhi Co-operative Societies Act
- 1972 lies to Delhi Co-operative Tribunal
