Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 4853 (MAD)

Antony Bennet Alias B. Bobby F/N: Denny Cine And TV Dancers Dance Directors Association v. Cine And TV Dancers And Dance Directors Association

2012-11-29

VINOD K.SHARMA

body2012
Judgment : The plaintiffs/applicants have filed a suit for declaration to challenge the continuation of defendant nos.2 to 21 as Office Bearers of Cine & TV Dancer's and Dance Director's Association beyond 13.06.2012, on the ground that the term of the Office Bearers ended on 13.06.2012. Inspite of end of tenure, the Office Bearers of the association have failed to hold election within the time stipulated as per the Bye-Laws. The consequential relief sought is for permanent injunction, restraining defendants 2 to 21 from continuing as Office Bearers. 2. It is the submission of plaintiffs/applicants, that the term of office of the respondents 2 to 21 was over on 13.06.2012, but by passing a resolution, the term of Office Bearers was extended illegally by one year. 3. This fact is disputed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents/defendants, by contending that the term was extended only for four months to avoid vacuum, as the elections were not held for the reasons beyond the control of the Office Bearers. 4. Along with the suit, the applicants/plaintiffs have moved O.A.No.947 of 2012, for grant of injunction against holding of election on 02.12.2012. 5. It is submitted by the plaintiffs/applicants, that according to the Bye-laws, the decision to hold election of the Office Bearers is required to be taken in the General Body Meeting, which can be held after seven days notice to members of the association. 6. It is however not disputed that notice of holding of meeting of General Body on 11.11.2012, was issued to the members. 7. The plaintiffs / applicants dispute the fact that though notice of meeting for 11.11.2012 was issued, but no meeting was held. Whereas the stand of respondents is that meeting was held on 11.11.2012, but at the different venue, as the plaintiffs / applicants and some of other members filed complaints with the Police. It was on account of the complaint and fear of breach of peace, that the venue had to be shifted. 8. The stand of the plaintiffs/applicants is that no notice regarding change of venue was issued to the members, and in any case, it was not issued to the plaintiffs/applicants. 9. It was on account of the complaint and fear of breach of peace, that the venue had to be shifted. 8. The stand of the plaintiffs/applicants is that no notice regarding change of venue was issued to the members, and in any case, it was not issued to the plaintiffs/applicants. 9. It is also the case of applicants/plaintiffs, that the plaintiffs/applicants did not have notice regarding the last date of filing nomination i.e. 17.11.2012, therefore, the plaintiffs/applicants and other persons interested to contest the election could not file their nomination papers. 10. This fact is also disputed by the learned counsel for the respondents/defendants, by contending, that change of venue was notified, by fixing the notification at the office of the association, in addition notices were also sent by SMS to all the members regarding change of venue. The meeting was held at the changed venue, where 296 members participated, wherein unanimous decision was taken to hold election on 02.12.2012. The last date of filing was also fixed in the General Body Meeting resolution passed on 11.11.2012. 11. The copy of SMS has not been placed on record. Nor intimation by SMS can be said to be a valid notice as per the Bye-laws. The recognized mode of notice under the Bye-laws is by post under the registered acknowledgment due or by post under the certificate of posting. 12. The reading of resolution passed further creates a doubt about holding of meeting. 13. This Court does not wish to express any opinion with regard to holding of General Body Meeting. The learned counsel for the parties on instructions agreed, that an opportunity can be given to the applicants/plaintiffs and other members, who may like to contest the election by postponing the date of election. 14. Therefore, this application is disposed of by consent of the parties, by passing following order: i) The date of election is postponed to 16.12.2012 at 10:00 a.m. at the registered office of the 1st defendant/respondent, i.e. The Cine & TV Dancer's and Dance Director's Association, Old No.8, New No.17, Burkit Road, T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017; ii) Notice will be issued to all the members and also pasted on the notice board of the office of the 1st defendant/respondent, informing the members that the date of nomination has been extended upto 10.12.2012; iii) The election shall be held under the supervision of i) Mr. S.R. Chandran, ii) A. Shanmugam & iii) Mr. Mohan Gandhi Raman, a member of Writers' Association. 15. In view of the fact, that fresh nominations are being invited, the election of members declared "unopposed" will now be subject to any fresh nomination for the post, and if any nomination is filed, election for the said post will also be held, and election of elected member will be deemed to have been set aside. 16. It will be open to the observer committee to fix the schedule for postal ballot, by inviting fresh votes by notifying the candidates contesting the election. 17. With the above observation, this application is disposed of. No costs.