Ashok Kumar Chakraborty, J. - (1.) This application under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against order dated January 21, 1994, passed by the learned Assistant District Judge, 6th Court, Alipore, in Misc. Appeal No. 106 of 1993 affirming the order No. 24 dated February 15, 1993, passed by the learned Munsif, 1st Court, Alipore, in Title Suit No 77 of 1992.
(2.) The facts of the case are that the petitioner filed Title Suit No. 77 of 1992 in the 1st Court of the learned Munsif at Alipore against the opposite parties praying, inter alia, for declaration of title and also for a further declaration that the Governing Body constituted by the opposite party No. 2 is illegal and has no locus standi to represent the defendant/opposite party No. 1 society and also for a declaration that the Memorandum of Association was invalid, ultra vires, illegal, arbitrary and not according to law, and not binding upon the petitioner and that the impugned notice dated January 23, 1992, was without jurisdiction and of no effect. The petitioner's case was that he was a founder member of the defendant No. 1 society and that he was illegally expelled from the membership of the society by resolution dated 23.1.92. It was further alleged that several acts of mal-feasance and misfeasance were committed by the defendant No. 2. It was also alleged that defendant No. 2 mis appropriated funds of the society. Accordingly an application for temporary injunction for restraining the defendant No. 2 from interfering with the functioning of the plaintiff as founder member of the Institute and its day to day functioning in the day section of the Institute at premises No. 6. Gariahat Road (South), Calcutta-31, P S. Jadavpur and from operating and withdrawing any money from the bank accounts of the Institute namely, S B A/C No. 4573 with the U B. I. Lake Gardens Branch and S. B. A/C No. 6A/4970 with the Indian Bank, Bjaliygunge Branch by passing any new resolution was filed. It was alleged on behalf of the petitioner that under the Rules of the Societies Registration Act the petitioner was not liable to expulsion as the jfoundcr member of the same and that no opportunity was given to him ibrmaking his defence against his expulsion from membership of the institute and thereby violating the provisions of natural justice
(3.) In the written objection several grounds against maintainability of the suit was taken. The case of the defendant was that under Rule 10 of the Memorandum certain immunity to the founder member have been followed but that does not mean that founder member is immuned from expulsion. Under Rule 11 clause 3 of the Memorandum any member Iran be expelled. It was further denied that the plaintiff was not given my opportunity of being heard before his expulsion and reference was made to two letters dated 112.91 and 9.11.92 respectively of the Institute addressed to the plaintiff where the plaintiff was informed that appropriate action would be taken against him It was further contended that the court should not interfere with the internal administration of the Institute.;