NADAR MAHAJAN SANGAM S. VELAICHAMY NADAR KALLOORI AND ORS.versusDISTRICT REGISTRAR (SOCIETIES AND ORS.)

A             NADAR MAHAJAN SANGAM S. VELAICHAMY
                    NADAR KALLOORI AND ORS.
                                          v.
               DISTRICT REGISTRAR (SOCIETIES AND ORS.)

                                   APRIL 7, 1997
B
                 [K. RAMASWAMY AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.)

          Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 :

C       Society-N.M.S.S. Vellaichamy Nadar College-Expiry of term of
  Society Committee-Elections 1101 held-Suit-Trial Judge directing the
  Registrar to co11duct e11qui1y--!n the meanwhile in the writ petition filed, High
  Court held that Trial Judge abdicated his judicial functioni11g by directi11g the
  Registrar to conduct a11 e11quiry-Appeal before Supreme Court-Direction
D issued to Tlial Court to appoi11t Local Com111issio11e1-Commissioner to con-
  duct electio11s afresh in accorda11ce with law-The Tlial Court shall pass
  approp1iate orders in the light of the report of the Conu.11issio11er and dfapose
  of the suit accordi11gly.

          CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 2880-82
E   of 1997.

         From the Judgment and Order dated 9.1.97 of the Madras High
    Court in C.M.A. No. 843/96, W.P. Nos. 9771 and 12007 of 1996.

           Kapil Sibal, D.D. Thakur, P.P. Rao V. Laxminarayan, Ms. Bina
F Gupta and Ms. Rakhi Ray for the Appellants.

          S. Siva Subramaniam, S. Subbaiah and K.V. Vijayakumar for the
     Respondents.

           The following Order of the Court was delivered :
G
           Leave granted.

           These appeals by special leave arise from the judgment of the
     Division Bench of the Madras High Court, made on January 9, 1997 in
H    CMA No. 843/96 and WP Nos. 9771and12007/96.
                                      690
           N. M. S.S. VELAICHAMY NADAR KALLOORI v. DIS1T. REGISTRAR (SOCIETIES)   691

               N.M.S.S. Vellaichamy Nadar College was established by Nadar A
        Mahajan Sangam in the year 1965 and election to the Society which runs
        the college, is the bone of the contention. Untrammeled by procedural
        formats and its ramifications in the process of election, the heart of the
        matter is good management of the college. Who is entitled to run the
        institution and administer property of the said institution is the crux of the B
        question. It is not in dispute that though the term of the previous Society
        Committee expired on March 31, 1966, elections could not be held for one
.....   reason or the other. As a consequence, at the pain of the entrustment of
        the management to the third agency, elections came to be held on June 9,
        1996, which proved to be an abortive attempt. Consequent thereon, a
        complaint was made to the Registrar in Form No. 7 on June 12, 1996. An C
        enquiry appears to have been held by the Registrar which failed in the
        process from legal perspectives but the report was submitted on June 19,
        1996. In the meanwhile, OS No. 417/96 was filed for perpetual injunction.
        An interim mandatory injunction was issued in I.A. No. 292/96 directing
        the Di~trict Registrar appointed under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registra- D
        tion Act, 1975 (for short, the 'Act') to find out factual position and then to
        submit the report. In the meanwhile, writ petitions came to be filed.
        Ultimately, the Division Bench came to the conclusion that the learned trial
        Judge had abdicated his functioning as an adjudicatory authority; he should
        have recorded the evidence and the findings by himself. Instead, he
        directed the Registrar to conduct an enquiry and, thereby it is a case of E
        abdication of judicial functioning. Accordingly, the impugned order was
        passed.

              We have heard learned counsel for both the parties. With a view to
        shorten the litigation, the appropriate course would be as under :              F

              The Civil Court is directed to appoint an Advocate as a Commis-
        sioner. The Advocate-Commissioner would take all the members of the
        Society existing as on May 14, 1996 as valid members. He should conduct
        the elections afresh in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the
        bye-laws of the Society. Till the elections are held, the Principal shall G
        continue to hold charge of the management of the institution and will act
        as Receiver of the Court under Order XL,· Rule 1, CPC. He shall be
        answerable to the Court. On receipt of the report from the Advocate-Com-
        missioner, the civil Court shall pass appropriate orders in the light of the
        report thus submitted and dispose of the suit accordingly. The expenditure H
    692                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  (1997] 3 S.C.R.

A incurred and fees of the Advocate-Commissioner should be as determined
    by the civil Court. Elections are directed to be conducted within " neriod
    of six weeks from the date of the appointment of the Advocate-Conrtnis-
    sioner by the trial Court. The trial Court is directed to appoint the
    Commissioner within two weeks from the date of the receipt of the order.
B   The trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit, after the election report
    is submitted, within three months thereafter. The fee of the Advocate-Com-
    missioner should be determined by the trial Court. The same shall be borne
    by the successful party. Initially, the same may be paid by the Principal
    from the College funds and later recovered by the College from the
    successful party to the suit.
c         The appeals are accordingly disposed of. No costs.

    T.N.A.                                                 Appeals disposed of.