Allowed

Sree Narayana Sevika Samajam v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Jul 2021WP(C)/12541/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner society faced refusal by Registrar to accept annual return documents due to pandemic delay. Court held pandemic restrictions precluded wilful default under Section 7(5) and ordered acceptance without fine, relying on Supreme Court's limitation orders.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed. Second respondent directed to accept petitioner's documents without insisting on payment of fine under Section 7(5) of the Act.

Sree Narayana Sevika Samajam Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 12541 OF 2021

¶4

PETITIONER:

¶5

SREE NARAYANA SEVIKA SAMAJAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SREE NARAYANA GIRL, THOTTUMUGHAM P.O., ALUVA-683105.

¶6

BY ADV M.R.ANISON

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695001.

¶9

2 THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR GENERAL OFFICE OF DISTRICT REGISTRAR, 2ND FLOOR, PERIMBILLY BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI-682011.

¶10

BY SMT. PRINCY XAVIER GP

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

W.P.(C) No.12541 of 2021

¶13

..2..

¶14

W.P.(C) No.12541 of 2021

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

Petitioner is a society registered under the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955 (the Act). It is engaged in running a home for destitute women and children and also an old age home. The 54^th Annual General Body Meeting of the society was held on 28.08.2019. In terms of the provisions of the Act, the society should have convened its 55^th Annual General Body Meeting within 15 months from date of the 54^th Annual General Body Meeting. It is stated by the petitioner that due to the restrictions imposed by the Government to contain the the pandemic, COVID-19, the society could not convene its 55^th Annual General Body Meeting within the time stipulated. The 55^th Annual General Body Meeting of the society could be convened only on 28.03.2021. In terms of the provisions of the Act, a list of members of the Governing Body elected in the

¶17

W.P.(C) No.12541 of 2021

¶18

..3..

¶19

Annual General Body Meeting is to be filed with the Registrar, the second respondent within 14 days from the date of the Annual General Body Meeting. It is stated by the petitioner that on account of the travel restrictions imposed by the Government in connection with the pandemic aforesaid, the petitioner could submit the list of the newly elected members only on 15.04.2021. Ext.P2 is the covering letter of the society forwarding the list of the newly elected members of the Governing Body to the second respondent. It is stated by the petitioner that the second respondent has refused to accept the documents forwarded along with Ext.P2 covering letter taking the stand that insofar as the 55^th Annual General Body Meeting of the Society was not convened and the documents required to be submitted thereafter were not submitted within the time stipulated in the Act, the society is liable to pay fine, as provided for in Section 7(5) of the Act. The case set out by the petitioner in the writ petition is that the delay on the part of the society in convening the Annual General Body Meeting

¶20

W.P.(C) No.12541 of 2021 ..4..

¶21

and submitting the documents was not wilful, and as such, the second respondent ought to have accepted the documents without insisting payment of fine. It is also the case of the petitioner that at any rate, in terms of Exts.P3 and P4 orders issued by the Apex Court, the second respondent was not justified in insisting payment of fine for accepting the documents forwarded by the society. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions to the second respondent to accept the documents forwarded by them along with Ext.P2 covering letter, without insisting payment of fine in terms of Section 7(5) of the Act.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.

¶23

As rightly pointed out by the petitioner, the

¶24

fine in terms of Section 7(5) of the Act could be imposed only if the Registrar finds that there is wilful default in holding the Annual General Body Meeting and submitting the list of newly elected members of the Governing Body to the Registrar.

¶25

W.P.(C) No.12541 of 2021

¶26

..5..

¶27

Having regard to the pandemic that hit the State during the early months of 2020 and the restrictions imposed by the State to contain the pandemic which are continuing even now, I am of the view that the delay on the part of the society in not convening its 55^th Annual General Body Meeting cannot be said to be wilful, especially when it is asserted by the society that it had convened all its earlier Annual General Body Meetings, and submitted the documents, on time. Be that as it may, Exts.P3 and P4 are orders issued by the Apex Court in exercise of the powers under Article 142 read with Article 141 of the Constitution of India in the wake of the pandemic, COVID-19. Among them, Ext.P3 is the order issued initially on 8.3.2021. The relevant portion of Ext.P3 order reads thus:

¶28

“2. We have considered the suggestions of the learned Attorney General for India regarding the future course of action. We deem it appropriate to issue the following directions:

¶29

In computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal, application or proceeding, the period from 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021 shall stand excluded. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 15.03.2020 if any, shall become available with effect

¶30

W.P.(C) No.12541 of 2021

¶31

..6..

¶32

from 15.03.2021.

¶33

In cases, where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 15.03.2021, in the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 15.03.2021, is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply.

¶34

The period from 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections 23(4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the Court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings.”

¶35

Ext.P4 is the order issued later by the Apex Court in line with Ext.P3 order, when the pandemic, COVID-19 hit the country again. The relevant part of the said order reads thus:

¶36

“We also take judicial notice of the fact that the steep rise in COVID-19 Virus cases is not limited to Delhi alone but it has engulfed the entire nation. The extraordinary situation caused by the sudden and second outburst of COVID-19 Virus,

¶37

W.P.(C) No.12541 of 2021

¶38

..7..

¶39

thus, requires extraordinary measures to minimize the hardship of litigant-public in all the States. We, therefore, restore the order dated 23^rd March, 2020 and in continuation of the order dated 08^th March, 2021 direct that the period(s) of limitation, as prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, whether condonable or not, shall stand extended till further orders.

¶40

It is further clarified that the period from 14^th March, 2021 till further orders shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections 23(4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the Court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings.

¶41

We have passed this order in exercise of our powers under Article 142 read with Article 141 of the Constitution of India. Hence it shall be a binding order within the meaning of Article 141 on all Courts/Tribunals and Authorities.”

¶42

As revealed from the extracted orders, it deals not only with the period of limitation for suits, appeals and applications, but also the period of limitation for other proceedings. Again, the orders aforesaid direct that it would bind not only Courts and

¶43

W.P.(C) No.12541 of 2021

¶44

..8..

¶45

Tribunals, but also other authorities. Even if the orders aforesaid do not apply strictly to the case on hand, having regard to the pandemic, COVID-19 that hit the State, and the various restrictions imposed by the State to contain the pandemic, including the restrictions on public gathering and travelling, I am of the view that it would be unfair and unreasonable to direct the society to pay fine intended to be imposed for wilful laches in convening the Annual General Body meeting and submission of documents within the time stipulated.

¶46

In the said view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed and the second respondent is directed to accept the documents forwarded by the petitioner along with Ext.P2 covering letter without insisting payment of fine in terms of Section 7(5) of the Act.

¶47

Sd/P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE

¶48

ds 21.07.2021

¶49

W.P.(C) No.12541 of 2021

¶50

..9..

¶51

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12541/2021

¶52

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶53

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE BYE-LAW OF PETITIONER SOCIETY.

¶54

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 15.04.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FORWARDING THE DOCUMENTS UNDER SECTION 7 & 13 OF ACT XII OF 1955.

¶55

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE APEX COURT DATED 08.03.2021 REPORTED IN 2021(2) KHC 291.

¶56

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE APEX COURT DATED 27.04.2021 REPORTED IN ILR 2021(2) KERALA 763.

Sree Narayana Sevika Samajam v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sree Narayana Sevika Samajam v. State of Kerala

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

Ratheesh M. Vs the Udayanapuram Grama Panchayath

Haris.N.v., Vs Edathala Grama Panchayat

T.V. Padmanabhan Vs National Medical Commission

Aarita Divine Vs State of Kerala

Jospi Alex Vs State of Kerala

Taniya Merlin Gomez Vs State of Kerala