TMI Blog2007 (1) TMI 573X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was appointed as Amicus Curiae. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. It is relevant to note that since valuation of the property allotted was one of the major grounds which weighed with the High Court while dealing with the matter, therefore, on the suggestion of counsel for the parties, Dr. Roshan H. Namavati, an approved valuer was asked to determine the market value of the properties in question as on the date of allotment i.e. on 1.3.1990. It appears that High Court found that one Mr. H.K. Khan has disposed of a plot for ₹ 22,00,000/-. According to the High Court same was the market price at which the plot in question could have been transferred by Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (in short the AUDA ) by applying the principle of 10% appreciation in market value. Calculated on that basis the High Court came to the conclusion that on the basis of the price of land allotted to Mr. H.K. Khan the allotment was made at an unreasonable rate. Dr. Roshan H. Namavati has valued that property in question as follows: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION: The results obtained by me based on my inspection of properties under valuation as well as instance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom survey No.199 TPS Vastrapur. It was also requested to fix the rate of the land at ₹ 300/- per sq. mtrs. On 21.07.1987 Respondent No.2 made a modified application for allotment of land stating that eventually about 150 Govt. employees of various categories would be members of the Society . On 24.11.1987 Respondent No.2 indicated that T.P. Plot 695 is designated for neighbourhood garden, play ground, library etc. and further requested that they may be granted 4000 sq. mts. of this land on condition that part of this land will be used for purposes within the meaning of neighbourhood centre and assured AUDA that Respondent No.2 was prepared to purchase land bearing survey Nos. 189 and 190 (Part) and survey Nos.199/1, 2, 3 of Vastrapur at the price indicated by AUDA. On 09.12.1987 resolution was adopted by AUDA to allot lands to Respondent No.2 bearing Survey No. 189, 190 Paiki of Vastrapur admeasuring 8693 sq. mtr., Survey Nos.199/1/2/3 of Vastrapur admeasuring 9208 sq. mtr. And Bodakdev Final Plot No.694 admeasuring 2739 sq. mtr., F.P. No.695 admeasuring 12516 sq. mtr. And F. P. No.696 admeasuring 5239 sq. mtr. on lease for 90 years. The land was to be allotted s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rice which had been paid by Respondent No.2 at the price prevailing the year 1987 much before Respondent No.4 was born. (c) Respondent No.4 suppressed this fact in earlier proceedings before the High Court resulting in the judgment dated 24.09.1991 and thus secured the judgment by practising fraud on the court. The High Court held that by impersonation office bearers of Respondent No.4 brought about the following consequences: (1) Respondent No.4 secured allotment of land at the price determined in 1987 while it actually came into existence on 5th July 1990. (2) Out of 54 members who were allotted plots by Respondent No.4, 42 persons had also been allotted plots by Government at Gandhi Nagar. (3) Respondent No.4 had taken possession of the land on the basis that it had 77 members while it had distributed plots only amongst 54 persons. The credentials of the valuer Dr. Roshan H. Namavati are quiet impressive. He is an approved valuer for more than five decades and is an author of several books on valuation. A few provisions of Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (in short the Act ) were succinctly stated in Zoroastrian Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. and Ano ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ransferred to him. The section also leaves a right to the heir or legal representative to require the society to pay him the value of the share or interest of the deceased member, ascertained as prescribed. Section 32 of the Act provides that the share or interest of a member in the capital of a Cooperative Society is not liable to attachment. Under Section 36 of the Act, the society even has the power to expel a member and unless otherwise ordered in special circumstances by the Registrar, such expelled member does not have a right of re-admission to membership. Sections 44 to 46 place restrictions on transactions with non-members and the said transactions were to be subject to such restrictions as may be prescribed. Under Chapter V of the Act, any society duly registered under the Act would be entitled to State aid. Under Section 73 of the Act, the final authority of the society is to vest in the general body of the society, subject to it being delegated in terms of the bye-laws of the society. The powers and functions of the Committee in which the management of every society vested, are dealt with in Section 74 of the Act. 12. The Gujarat Co-operative Societies Rules ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erned States enacted laws for themselves. It was, thus, that the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925 was enacted. We have earlier noticed some of the relevant provisions of the Act and it is not necessary to repeat them here. Under Section 72 of the Act, a society registered either under the Cooperative Credit Societies Act, 1904 or the Cooperative Societies Act, 1912 was to be deemed to be registered under the Act. What is required to be noticed is that in this Act also, when the object of the society was the creation of funds to be lent to its members, the membership had to be confined to persons belonging to the same town or village or same group of villages or they had to be members of the same tribe, class (originally it was caste) or occupation unless the Registrar ordered otherwise. It was this Act, under which the present appellant Society got itself registered, though it later came to be governed by the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act which was subsequently enacted. We have already adverted to the general provisions thereof but it may be relevant to notice here that under Section 6, no society other than a federal society, could be registered unless it consisted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to be met on behalf of the respondents by reference to another decision of this Court in Daman Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors. [ 1985 (2) SCC 670]. Therein, their Lordships, after referring to Damyanti s case (supra), held that that decision had no application to the situation before them. The position was explained in the following words:- That case has no application whatever to the situation before us. It was a case where an unregistered society was by statute converted into a registered society which bore no resemblance whatever to the original society. New members could be admitted in large numbers so as to reduce the original members to an insignificant minority. The composition of the society itself was transformed by the Act and the voluntary nature of the association of the members who formed the original society was totally destroyed. The Act was, therefore, struck down by the Court as contravening the fundamental right guaranteed by Art. 19(1)(f). In the cases before us we are concerned with co-operative societies which from the inception are governed by statute. They are created by statute, they are controlled by statute and so, there can be no objecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
