Dismissed

Bhatnagars Co-Operative House Building Society Ltd. v. Sandeep Bhatnagar & Anr.

Delhi HC9 Jul 2018W.P.(C)/6966/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a Cooperative Society challenging a revision order. The court rejected the society's claim of merit due to a delay of nearly three years, characterizing the challenge as belated and justified by laches.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed on grounds of delay and laches; no costs awarded.

Bhatnagars Co-Operative House Building Society Ltd. Vs… — Cooperative Societies | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~53

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 6966/2018

¶4

Date of decision: 9^th July, 2018

¶5

BHATNAGARS’ COOPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD. ..... Petitioner

¶6

Through Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Ms. K. Kaomudi Kiran Pathak & Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha, Advocates.

¶7

versus

¶8

SANDEEP BHATNAGAR & ANR. ..... Respondents

¶9

Through Mr. Jawahar Raja, ASC, GNCTD & Mr. Rajat Kumar, Advocate.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

¶11

SANJIV KHANNA, J. (ORAL):

¶12

In this writ petition filed on 31st May 2018, Bhatnagars’ Cooperative House Building Society Limited (Cooperative Society, for short) has challenged order dated 29^th September, 2015 passed by the Financial Commissioner in Case No. 99/2013. The impugned order dismisses the revision filed by the Cooperative Society against the order passed by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies dated 24^th January, 2013.

¶13

W.P. (C) No. 6966/2018 Page 1 of 5

¶14

The present writ petition has been filed after a long delay of nearly three years. On being questioned, learned counsel for the Cooperative Society explaining the delay submits that the respondent, Sandeep Bhatnagar son of late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar, had filed an appeal/application under Section 28(1) of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 (2003 Act, for short) before the Registrar, Cooperative Societies for transfer of membership in his name on death of his father. By order dated 26^th February, 2018, the prayer was allowed. This period should be excluded. We are not satisfied with the aforesaid explanation and justification. Aforesaid explanation has no connect and does not justify delay of nearly three years in challenge to order dated 9^th September, 2015. Proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 28 were in nature of execution and for effective and complete implementation of the order dated 29^th September, 2015. Cooperative Society in-spite of order dated 29^th September, 2015 had failed to act in accordance with law.

¶15

The facts exposit that one Prakashwati had become member of the Cooperative Society on 11^th October, 1955. Prakashwati in 1958 had purchased a residential property. On 25^th January, 1967, Prakashwati had made an application for transfer of membership to her son-in-law Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar. On 27^th February, 1967, request for transfer of membership in favour of Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar was accepted. Thus, Parakashwati ceased to be a member of the Cooperative Society and Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar became a member.

¶16

In 1975, land was allotted to the Cooperative Society and plots were developed and carved out. Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar made payments

¶17

W.P. (C) No. 6966/2018 Page 2 of 5

¶18

towards development and cost of land. Cooperative Society had accepted the payments. On 3^rd October, 1981, plot No. 85 was allotted to Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar and registered sub-lease deed was executed.

¶19

On 12^th December, 1986, a show cause notice was issued by the Cooperative Society to Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar why the sub-lease deed of the plot should not be cancelled as Prakashwati had incurred disqualification when she had purchased residential plot in 1958 and, therefore, transfer of membership in favour of Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar in 1967 was illegal. Subsequently, it was observed and resolved by the Cooperative Society that transfer of membership in favour of Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar was bad and reference was made to Registrar, Cooperative Societies and Delhi Development Authority for approval of cessation of membership and cancellation of the sub-lease deed of the plot.

¶20

In these circumstances, Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar had filed a petition under Section 87 of the 2003 Act, before the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, which was accepted vide order dated 18^th January, 2013.

¶21

Cooperative Society had then preferred a revision petition, which vide the impugned order dated 29^th September, 2015 has been dismissed by the Financial Commissioner.

¶22

Counsel for the Cooperative society relies on Rule 25(1)(c) of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 1973 and states that Prakashwati had incurred disqualification as no person could have continued as a member of a cooperative society if he or she, spouse or dependent children were owner a residential house. Reliance is placed on Ishwar Nagar Cooperative

¶23

W.P. (C) No. 6966/2018 Page 3 of 5

¶24

Housing Building Society versus Parma Nand Sharma and Others, (2010) 14 SCC 230.

¶25

Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar was enrolled as a member in 1967. This enrollment by transfer had taken place before enactment and enforcement of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 1973. Decision in the case of Ishwar Nagar Cooperative Housing Building Society (supra) would not be applicable to the case at hand in the said factual background.

¶26

Counsel for the petitioner submits that model bye-laws also had a clause stipulating that no person shall be a member unless he would sign a declaration that he/she, spouse or any of his/her dependants did not own a dwelling house or plot in Delhi and was not a member of any other cooperative society. It is submitted that these bye-laws should have been applied when the transfer in 1967 was made. We are not impressed with this argument for the simple reason that the Cooperative Society could have inducted Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar as a member in his own right as on 27^th February, 1967. Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar had not incurred any disqualification under the bye-laws or the Rules. Correct facts were always known and it is not alleged that facts were concealed. Cooperative Society after deliberation and consideration had enrolled Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar as a member.

¶27

We do not think the Cooperative Society should be allowed to go back in time by 20 years as the issue of membership of Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar was questioned for the first time in 1986. This was after payments made by Late Brij Nath Swarup Bhatnagar from 1967 till 1981 towards cost and development of the plot had been accepted. Cooperative

¶28

W.P. (C) No. 6966/2018 Page 4 of 5

¶29

Society should not be allowed to unsettle the settled issues. This would not be fair and just.

¶30

In the aforesaid background and factual matrix, we are not inclined to entertain belatedly and delayed challenge by the Cooperative Society to the order dated 29^th September, 2015 passed by the Financial Commissioner. Facts of the present case do not justify overlooking or ignoring three years delay. This litigation should be closed and brought to an end.

¶31

The writ petition is dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. No costs.

¶32

SANJIV KHANNA, J. CHANDER SHEKHAR, J. JULY 09, 2018 VKR

¶33

W.P. (C) No. 6966/2018 Page 5 of 5

Bhatnagars Co-Operative House Building Society Ltd. v. Sandeep Bhatnagar & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhatnagars Co-Operative House Building Society Ltd. v. Sandeep Bhatnagar & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amit Kumar Vs South Delhi M.C.D. through D.C.M.C.D Green Park and Ors.

D.K.Kaushik Vs B.S.E.S. & Anr.

S.P.Garg Vs Syndicate Bank

Paresh Nath Sharma Vs UOI & Ors.

Pramod Vs Cement Corporation of India (Cci)

Shaik Riaz Ahmed Vs Fiitjee Ltd. & Ors.

Anil Kumar Gupta & Ors. Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr.

Vishal Tokas Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Union Bank of India Vs Canara Bank & Ors.

Airport Authority of India Vs M/S Virender Khanna & Associates

Pradeep Jain Vs Union Bank of India & Anr.

Resident Welfare Asociation Vs Deputy Commissioner of Police General Adminstration ,Delhi & Ors.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Lt Col Hawa Singh Jattayan ( Retd)

Hem Chand Gupta & Ors. Vs Bombay Mercantile Co-Operative Bank & Anr.