Allowed

The Committee of Management, Maharshi Kapil Muni Shiksha Samiti and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2021CMRA/44/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This review application challenged specific observations in an earlier writ judgment regarding voluntary dissolution of a society. The court examined the resolution dated 1.4.2011 and allowed the review, recalling certain paragraphs while clarifying that the underlying dispute between parties had not been adjudicated.

What did the court decide?

Review application allowed; specific observations in the impugned judgment recalled; clarification that the dispute between parties was not adjudicated.

The Committee of Management, Maharshi Kapil Muni… — Company and Corporate | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION No. - 44 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- The Committee Of Management, Maharshi Kapil Muni Shiksha Samiti And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nipun Singh,Saroj Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C.,Ved Prakash Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶5

The present review application has been filed seeking review of the judgment dated 8.12.2020 passed in Writ-C No. 19885 of 2020, whereby after discussing on the scope of Sections 13, 13A and 13-B of the Societies Registration Act, this Court was of the view that in the cases of voluntary resolution, no approval from any officer or authority required.

¶6

Shri Nipun Singh, appearing on behalf of review-applicant, submits that there was serious disputes in the management, for which various writ petitions were filed before this Court with regard to the list of members. However, he argues that he has no contention or submission with regard to the law laid down in the order dated 8.12.2020. He is only aggrieved with the contentions made in paragraph 16 to the following effect:-

¶7

"In the present case, it is alleged that by a resolution passed unanimously i.e. by more than three-fifth members of the society on 1.4.2011, the society has been dissolved, as such, no further approval is required and the dissolution would be deemed to be effective from the date of its passing i.e. 1.4.2011.

¶8

However, petitioners are directed to give an information in writing along with the copy of Resolution to the Assistant Registrar of Societies who shall record the same in his records."

¶9

He further argues that even in the resolution dated 1.4.2011, there was no resolution for dissolving the society, as such Section 13 of the Societies Registration Act itself could not

¶10

have been triggered and accordingly the Court has been mislead in passing the order dated 8.12.2020.

¶11

I have perused the order as well as the resolution dated 1.4.2011, which is on record and is to the following effect:-

¶12

" सतयवतममशननपसततवरखतमकमहतमवदतलयसससतयटटकतटटसटबनतयत जतयनतथतइसकककतयरवतहटअमतशटघककजतयन।इसपसततवकतसभट सदसययननसवरसमममतसनअननमसदनमकयत। "

¶13

On the reading of the resolution, as extracted above, Shri Nipun Singh argues that there was no resolution for dissolving the society and only a decision was taken that further steps be taken for dissolving the society, in practice and in actual there was no dissolution of the society and as such Section 13 of the Societies Registration Act itself could not be triggered.

¶14

On perusal of the said resolution dated 1.4.2011, which is on record and as extracted above, the submission of the counsel for the review applicant merits acceptance. As such, the review application is allowed. The observations made in paragraphs 16 and 17 of the said judgment and as extracted above are recalled. The second part of paragraph 17 of the said judgment is also recalled. The other parts of the judgment shall remain as it is.

¶15

The review application is allowed in terms of the order passed above.

¶16

It is further clarified that this Court has not gone into the dispute in between the parties, as alleged and argued before me and further the society shall be free to take steps in accordance with law after passing the resolution which is required under Section 13 of the Societies Registration Act.

¶17

Order Date :- 16.7.2021 S. Rahman

The Committee of Management, Maharshi Kapil Muni Shiksha Samiti and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Committee of Management, Maharshi Kapil Muni Shiksha Samiti and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhanu Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Manveer Singh and 12 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Beer Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Om Prakash Rai Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Rajesh Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nilesh Kumar Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others