GURDWARA PRABANDHAK COMMITTEE, DELHI CANTONMENT AND OTHERS Vs. AMARJIT SINGH SABHARWAL AND OTHERS
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
GURDWARA PRABANDHAK COMMITTEE, DELHI CANTONMENT AND OTHERS
AMARJIT SINGH SABHARWAL AND OTHERS
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)The Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee is a Society registered under Societies Act. It is managing the affairs of the Gurdwara and a Girls School in Delhi Cantonment. The present Managing Committee is in office after this Court directed the election to be held and pursuant to which the elections were held on 11th October, 1981. Respondents Amarjit Singh, H.S.Dhillon, Kartar Singh and Anaib Singh were the members of the earlier Managing Committee. A suit was filed against the said Managing Committee under Section 92, C. P. C. as they had allegedly committed various illegalities and were refusing to hold elections after their term had long expired. The matter came to High Court and the elections were ordered by this Court. The said Amarjit Singh, H.S.Dhillon and Kartar Singh, were not elected and they lost power. Although they had lost the elections, Amarjit Singh and one Anaib Singh (former Presidents) refused to handover the charge, account books or minute books. A contempt application was moved against the said persons by the new Managing Committee. The said proceedings is continuing.
(2.)The new Managing Committee has removed Anaib Singh from the Chairmanship of the Girls School Committee. He has filed a suit and the same is pending in the District Court. He has preferred an appeal against the order of the Trial Court refusing interim injunction. The appeal is admitted but no interim injunction has been ordered by the Appellate Court.
(3.)The said four respondents and some others thereafter filed a suit under Section 92, C. P. C. against the present Management. The main grievance in the suit is that Anaib Singh was removed from the Chairmanship and one Santosh Kumar Gupta, T. G. T., was removed from the School. It was also alleged that the accounts were not properly maintained. Through the suit the respondents want the enquiry to be conducted in the affairs of the Society under the new Management. It may be stated that the suit was filed within four months from the new Management coming into power. In the plaint itself a prayer was made seeking permission to file the suit under Section 92, C. P. C. A summons/ notices in the suit was issued to the petitioner. He filed a written statement raising certain preliminary objections and replying the averments on merit. The learned District Judge passed the following order permitting the respondents to file the suit:
" Arguments heard, permission, as required under Section 92, Civil Procedure Code, to file the suit is granted."
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.