- (1.) The office of the second respondent issued a notice on 9/5/1980 to the first respondent-Society (hereinafter referred to as "the Society") to show cause within 15 days from the date of receipt of that notice as to why the Managing Committee (then in office) of the Society should not be removed and an administrator appointed in its place. The said show-cause notice signed by the Deputy Registrar (H) pointed out several irregularities committed by the said Managing Committee. Immediately the Society through its then President moved the Delhi High court by filing CW No. 661 of 1980 challenging the said show-cause notice. Ultimately that writ petition was disposed of on the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties and the High court passed an order on 22/5/1981 based on a memo of compromise. The relevant clause in the order is clause (iii) which reads as follows: "That the Society will send notice, by registered post acknowledgement due to all the persons who are in arrears with the Society in respect of an amount exceeding Rs. 500. 00. By this notice, these persons will be asked to file the requisite affidavits and pay the balance of the amount due from them as shown in column 9 of Annx. P/32 for the plots proposed to be allotted to them, which amount includes interest at the rate of 15% per annum from 1/01/1979 up to 30/04/1981 or an earlier date till which they were in default. The requisite affidavits and the crossed bank drafts in favour of the petitioner Society for the amounts demanded in the notices (as shown in column 9 of Annx. P/32 must reach the Society within one month from the date of despatch of the said notice. The failure to submit the requisite affidavits or to make payment within the time shall finally disentitle the person in default from participating in the elections as also, from getting the allotment of a plot. No further relaxation, whatsoever, shall be made and the present relaxation shall not be treated as a precedent. "
(2.) It is the case of the Society that pursuant to the above extracted clause in the compromise order, the appellant was called upon to file an affidavit (the form of which was enclosed along with notice) within the time prescribed therein. The said notice was served on the father of the appellant as at the relevant time, the appellant was in the United States of America. As the appellant did not file the affidavit in time, he was removed from the Society's membership and consequently he lost the right of allotment of the plot even though admittedly he had paid the entire cost of the plot and was not in arrears of any kind on the date when the first respondent issued a notice calling upon the appellant to sign the affidavit. The affidavit required such member of the Society who was entitled to get allotment to state on oath that neither he nor his spouse owns any plot or house in Delhi. It is to be noted at this stage that such a declaration was already signed and filed by the appellant as required under bye-law (ii) and after getting such declaration he was admitted as a member of the Society.
(3.) The appellant aggrieved by the action of the Society removing him from its membership moved the Delhi High court by filing CMP No. 881 of 1983 in CW No. 661 of 1980 in which the High court earlier passed the order on the basis of the compromise memo giving certain directions to the Society. According to the appellant, the said CMP was to permit him to file the affidavit even though he was not liable to file such an affidavit in terms of clause (iii) of the High court order. The High court did not agree with the contention of the appellant that he was not liable to file such an affidavit and he having come to the court after an inordinate and unexplained delay, was not entitled to the relief sought for. On that ground the High court rejected the application. In these circumstances, the present appeal by special leave has been filed by the appellant.;