Disposed

Mr Kedarnath v. the Cosmopolitan Club (R)

Karnataka HC14 Mar 2024MFA/1017/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal against the rejection of an interim injunction application was disposed of, holding that it did not survive as the appellant filed a fresh application in the Trial Court for modification based on new facts regarding the registration of club bye-laws.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is disposed of; I.A. No.1/2024 for stay is also disposed of. Liberty granted to the appellant to pursue remedy before the Trial Court.

Mr Kedarnath Vs the Cosmopolitan Club (R) — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:10812 MFA No. 1017 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1017 OF 2024 (CPC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MR. KEDARNATH S/O SRI. K.R. SRIRAMALU AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, HON. SECRETARY, THE COSMOPOLITIAN CLUB, JAYANAGAR, IIIRD BLOCK, BENGALURU-560011 RESIDING AT NO.292/A, 34^TH CROSS, 4^TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU SOUTH-560011

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. SUKUMARAN G., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by BS RAVIKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

THE COSMOPOLITAN CLUB (R) 22^ND CROSS, 3^RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 011 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT

¶13

MR. A.N.K. RAJU THE PRESIDENT, THE COSMOPOLITAN CLUB (R) 22^ND CROSS, 3^RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560011

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. B.S. REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR CAVEATOR / RESPONDENT NO.1 IN C.P No.3008/2024 AND ALSO FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2;

¶16

SMT. H. PAVITHRA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1 (NOC))

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:10812 MFA No. 1017 of 2024

¶18

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03.02.2024 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 IN O.S. NO.7277/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY, DISMISSING THE I.A.NO.1 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULES 1 AND 2 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC.

¶19

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

The plaintiff in O.S. No.7277/2023 on the file of XXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-36) (henceforth referred to as ‘the Trial Court’) has filed this appeal challenging the correctness of an order dated 03.02.2024 by which an application (I.A No.1) filed by him under XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘CPC’) was rejected.

¶22

The suit in O.S No.7277/2023 was filed for declaration that the proceedings dated 18.10.2023 issued by the defendant No.2, who is the President of the defendant No.1 - Club suspending the plaintiff from

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:10812 MFA No. 1017 of 2024

¶24

membership and as Honorary Secretary of the Club be declared as null and void. Along with the suit, he also filed an application (I.A.No.1) for an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the functioning of the plaintiff as honorary Secretary of the defendant No.1-Club pending disposal of the suit.

¶25

The Trial Court in terms of the impugned order,

¶26

rejected the application (I.A. No.1) following which the present appeal is filed. When the appeal was listed for admission today, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 / defendant No.1 - Club submitted that an application is now filed by the plaintiff before the Trial Court for modification of the impugned order in view of certain new facts that the plaintiff has unearthed. He, therefore, submits that this appeal does not survive for consideration as the plaintiff has chosen to go back before the Trial Court to seek modification of the impugned order.

¶27

Learned counsel for the plaintiff / appellant

¶28

does not dispute the fact that he has filed a fresh

¶29

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:10812 MFA No. 1017 of 2024

¶30

application seeking modification of the impugned order. If the plaintiff has chosen to go back to the Trial Court to seek modification of the impugned order on the ground that some documents placed by the defendants before the Trial Court were not the documents that were filed before the District Registrar of Societies and that the Trial Court was misled into believing that bye-laws produced by the defendants were registered before the District Registrar of Societies, then it is for the plaintiff to establish the same before the same Court. This Court cannot take those events into consideration while considering the correctness of the impugned order passed by the Trial Court.

¶31

In that view of the matter, this appeal is disposed off reserving liberty to the appellant / plaintiff to pursue his remedy before the Trial Court in accordance with law. The Trial Court is directed to consider and dispose off the application filed by the plaintiff as early as possible, which at any rate, shall not exceed two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:10812 MFA No. 1017 of 2024

¶33

¶34

In view of disposal of this appeal, I.A.

¶35

No.1/2024 for stay does not survive for consideration and

¶36

the same stands disposed off.

¶37

Sd/JUDGE

¶38

SMA

¶39

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43

Mr Kedarnath v. the Cosmopolitan Club (R)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Kedarnath v. the Cosmopolitan Club (R)

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

Smt K Gowri Vs Sri K Satynarayana Setty

M Rangamma Vs R Chandra Reddy

Smt Mary Jayashree Vs Venkatalakshmi

Smt v Vani Vs Smt Saritha Bai K.M.

M Kempanna Vs Rajith N R

Smt. Huchamma Vs Smt. Sannamma