SATISH CHANDRA versus REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, DELHI.

Citation: [1994] 3 S.C.R. 618 · Decided: 21-04-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, N. VENKATACHALA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
SATISH CHANDRA 
v. 
REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, DELHI. 
APRIL 21, 1994 
B 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.] 
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 : S.11--Constructive res judicata-Ex-
pulsion of members from cooperative housing society--fleld, omission to 
challenge the resolution of expulsion in writ petition before High Court 
C operates as constructive res judicata-Writ petition under Art. 32 thereafter not 
maintainable-De/hi Cooperative Housing Societies Act 1972. 
Constitution of India-Articles 32 & 22(r-Maintainability of Writ Peti-
tion-Held, memhership of cooperative society is a right under a statute and 
not a fundamental right-Supreme Court does not encourage bypassing 
D statutory remedy or remedy under Article 226-De/hi Cooperative Housing 
Societies Act 1972, Ss. 34 and 32. 
Delhi Cooperative Housing Societies Act 1972-Sections 34 and 
32-Resolution of expulsion from society not challenged before High 
Court-constitutionality of Section 34 upheld by High Court, and not agrued 
E in Supreme Court-Hence not considered-Constitution of India, Articles 226 
and 136. 
By resolution dated 22 February, 1990 passed by the general body 
of a Housing 
Society the petitioners were expelled from its member-
F 
ship. The petitioners did not challenge their expulsion but the appoint-
ment of architect; the residential qualification for membership; the 
draw of lots; for appointment of an Administrator and consequential 
reliefs. 
In a related appeal under Article 136, they challenged the con-
G stitutionality of Section 34 of the Delhi Cooperative House Societies Act 
1972, and for appointment of an Administrator of the Respondent-
Society under Section 32 of the Act. 
The litigation had gone through two stages of writ petition in the 
H High Court, and one in this court under Article 32. A writ petition filed by 
618 
• 
S. CHANDRA v. CO-OP. SOCIETIES 
619 
~' 
the members of the respondent-Society had also been dismissed by a A 
3-judge bench of this court. 
Dismissing the petitions, thi• court 
HELD : 1. The right to membership of a cooperative society is a right 
B 
under a statute and not a fundamental right. If the petitioners have been 
.. 
~ 
removed otherwise than in accordance with law, they have to pursue the 
remedy as provided under the Act. This court does not encourage the filing 
of the writ petition under Article 32, bypassing the statutory remedy and 
the remedy of Article 226. [622-B-C] 
c 
Raj Rani v. Delhi Administration, AIR (1977) SC 1980, distinguished 
and Tilokchand Motichand v. H.B. Munshi, CST, AIR (1970) SC 898, 
referred to. 
2. The petitioners might and ought to have raised the legality of their D 
expulsion from membership of the society. The omission to raise it in the 
• 
writ petition before the High Court operates as constructive res judicata to 
• 
maintain the writ petition under Art. 32. [622-F-G] 
3. Despite the willingness of the High Court to direct the respondent-
E 
... 
Society to withdraw the expulsion resolution subject to the petitioners 
paying the arrears with interest thereon, they had not availed of the court's 
indulgence. [622-A-BJ 
4. The petitioners not having challenged the order of expulsion 
passed by the general body and approved by the Registrar, it was not F 
necessary for the High Court to go into the question of expulsion. 
[623-D-E) 
5. In view of the fact that no arguments had been addi-essed before 
this court on the question of the validity of Section 34 6r the refusal to 
pass an order under Section 32 of the Act for appointment of an ad- G 
ministrator, it is not necessary to go into those question. [623-F-G) 
~ 
6. The petitioners may make a representation to the society regard-
' 
ing refund of the amount they have deposited, which may be disposed of 
in accordance with law. (624-A-B) 
H 
620 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1994] 3 S.C.R. 
A 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave petition (C) 
No. 630 of 1994. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 16.7.93 of the Delhi High Court 
in C.W. No. 527 of 1990. 
B 
WITH 
Writ Petition (c) No. 20 of 1994. 
i- .. 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India). 
c 
Sarai Chandra and Satish Chandra in-person. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
JN WRIT PETITION NO. 20/1994 
D 
The petitioners are the practising advocates. They were the mem-
bers of the Supreme Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd., 110, 
Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi, for short 'the 
• 
Housing
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.