Delhi District Court
Kim Chong Chul vs Registrar Of Societies on 25 August, 2025
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE-02SHAHDARA DISTRICT,
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
Presided by : Varun Chandra, DJS.
Civil Suit No: 267/14 (Old)
Civil Suit no. 9250/16 (New)
1. Sh. Kim Chong Chul
President of
Hankuk Budhist Society
Ground Floor, Rudraksh Guest House
Rampur Road, Bodh Gaya
Bihar-824231
Through his Attorney Sayed Mustaque
2. Hankuk Budhist Society
Rudraksh Guest House
Ground Floor, Rudraksh Guest House
Gaya Bihar-824231
Through its Secretary Sh. Lalan Yadav
... Plaintiffs
Versus
1. The Registrar of Societies
Govt. Of NCT of Delhi
Office of Special Commissioner of Industries
419, Udyog Sadan, Patparganj, Industrial Area
2. Mr. Hyeon Dong Hwa deceased and omitted
(In terms of order dated 09.01.2025)
3. Smt. Satyawati Kumari Gupta
W/o Sh. Bhola Sao
R/o Sahamir Takiya
PS Civil Line Gaya, Bihar
4. Jong Woo Kim
S/o Sh. Jung Gom Kim
R/o Room No. 6, International Hostel
Sanstrit University, Varanasi, U.P.
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies signed by
Page No.1 of 54 VARUN
VARUN CHANDRA
CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26
17:08:28
+0530
5. Sh. Annirudh Kumar Singh
R/o Gaiwal Bigha, Bengali Colony,
P.S. Rampur,Gaya, Bihar
6. Sh. Wannadhaza
R/o Burmese Budhist Temple
P.O. Sarnath, Varanasi, U.P.
7. Sh. Bhawesh Kumar
S/o Sh. Devender Parsad Singh
R/o Ganga Mehal
P.S. Kotwali, Gaya, Bihar
8. Sh. Lobsang Shedb
R/oSillingwas Shoping, Shamshi
175126, Distt. Kullu, Himachal
Pradesh
9. Sh. Anil Kumar
R/o Ganga Mehal
Radeshya Compound
P.S. Kotwali, Gaya, Bihar
10. Sh. Ratan Kishore Shukla
(Behind-Bengali Pada Thana)
P.O. Rajgir Distt. Nalanda, Bihar-803116
... Defendants
SUIT FOR DECLARATION, PERMANENT AND
MANDATORY INJUNCTION
DATE OF INSTITUTION : 15.07.2014
DATE OF FINAL ARGUMENTS : 12.08.2025
DATE OF DECISION : 25.08.2025
JUDGMENT
1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit against the defendants for seeking reliefs of declaration, permanent and Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies signed by VARUN Page No.2 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:08:35 +0530 mandatory injunction along with cost of the suit. The exact prayer made in the plaint of the present suit, is reproduced below:-
"In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:-
(a). Declare the order dated 17/06/2014 passed by Defendant No. 1 is illegal, null & void, non-est, without jurisdiction and can't be acted upon.
(b) Pass a Decree of Declaration to the effect that the list of governing body to control and manage the Plaintiff No. 2 Society, filed by Plaintiff No. 1 be declared as valid and legal.
(c) Pass a decree of Permanent Injunction in favour of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendant Nos. 2.
to 10 thereby restraining them, their agents, successors, employees, assignees from creating any hindrance or disturbance in the control and management of the Plaintiff No. 2 Society by Plaintiff No. 1 and other office bearers of the Society.
(d) Pass a Decree of Mandatory Injunction against the Defendants No. 1 thereby directing the Defendant No. 1 to certify the list of governing body filed by the Plaintiff No. 1 and supply the certify copy thereof."
2. In order to justify the grant of the aforesaid reliefs/prayer, it is inter-alia pleaded in the plaint of the present suit that the Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies Digitally signed by VARUN Page No.3 of 54 CHANDRA VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:08:42
+0530
plaintiff no. 2 is a society duly registered with defendant no. 1 under Society Registration Act, 1860 vide Registration no. S/22187 of 1991 and the plaintiff no. 1 is a Korean National and is Monk and was duly elected President of the plaintiff no. 2 Society. Sh. Sayed Mustaque was duly appointed attorney of the plaintiff no. 1 vide GPA dated 07.01.2011; that the plaintiff no. 2 Society is being represented through its Secretary, Sh. Lallan Yadav who is authorized by Executive Committee Resolution dated 11.07.2024; that the defendant no. 2 to 10 are self declared members of the plaintiff no. 2 Society who are claiming themselves as office bearers/Executive Member of the plaintiff no. 2 Society; that 15.12.2006, the plaintiff no. 1 was elected as the President of the plaintiff no. 2 Society in General Body meeting of the Society and since then he has been looking after the management and affairs of the plaintiff no. 2 Society and he had appointed an attorney to represent him in courts and government offices in India; that the plaintiff no. 1 had filed the list of Governing body to the office of the defendant no. 1 on record and the plaintiff no. 1 was running the affairs of the society with the help of other officer bearers and members of the society without any interference from anybody; that the dispute arose when the some local people with a view to grab the property of the plaintiff no. 2 Society, started interfering in the function of the society; that one person, namely, Sh. Umesh Kumar prepared a fake list of Managing Committee of the plaintiff no. 2 Society comprising defendants no. 2 to 9 and submitted before the defendant no. 1 with collusion and connivance of some of its official, a notice of default issued for not submitting the annual list of the governing body of the plaintiff no. 2 Society; that on Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies Digitally signed by VARUN Page No.4 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:08:48 +0530 14.01.2011, the plaintiff no. 1 had gone for some work to Delhi and when he reached to Bodh Gaya and entered into the premises of the society, he found that his room was open and 2-3 people were present there; that when he had not found his valuables in the room, he enquired from the persons presented there and they told that his belonging had been taken away by Sh. Umesh Kumar and other persons; that on 19.02.2011, Sh. Umesh Kumar along with defendant no. 4, 5, 9 and some other persons came inside to the premises of the society and put pistol on head of the plaintiff and told that they would kill him, if he would not leave the premises;
that the plaintiff no. 1 came outside the premises of the society leaving his belonging being afraid from the aforesaid persons; that the aforesaid persons kept the pistol in bag of the plaintiff and called the police and told them that the plaintiff no. 1 came to the premises alongwith a pistol; that the belongings of the plaintiff no. 1 including some original papers regarding the affairs of the Society were also being taken away along with cash and other articles; that the plaintiff no. 1 had lodged an FIR no. 39/2011 dated 19.02.2011 U/s 341/342/352/379/448/34 IPC against the accused persons in PS Bodh Gaya; that the police had not taken any necessary action against the accused persons as the accused persons were local influential persons and therefore, the plaintiff no. 1 was not able to recover his belongings from the aforesaid persons; that on the same day, the plaintiff no. 1 had left Bodh Gaya due to apprehension of danger to his life; that the groups led by Sh. Umesh Kumar took over the possession of the society premises due to which the plaintiff no. 1 has been running the plaintiff no. 2 Society from the address as mentioned in the case title; that the plaintiff no. 1 had Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies Digitally signed by VARUN Page No.5 of 54 CHANDRA VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:08:55
+0530
submitted all the necessary documents with the defendant no. 1 and had requested to issue certified copy of the list of governing body of the Society and the representatives of the plaintiffs have appeared on various occasions and shown all the relevant document in this regard; that the plaintiffs had received a copy of the order dated 17.06.2014 passed by the defendant no. 1 thereby certifying list of governing body of the plaintiff no. 2 Society comprising defendant no. 2 to 10; that the defendant no. 1 had not given any opportunity to the plaintiffs to explain their stand and ignored the documents placed on the record of the defendant no. 1; that the plaintiffs also filed a representation dated 09.07.2024 before the Commissioner of Industries, Govt. of NCT Delhi and also before the defendant no. 1 for set aside the order dated 17.06.2014 but the defendant no. 1 did not hear the plaintiffs and not inclined to reopen the issue; that the defendant no. 1 had referred Section 13 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 which is not applicable in the fact and circumstances of the present case as it relates to provisions of dissolution of Societies and adjustments of their affairs; that aggrieved by the actions of the defendants, the plaintiffs have filed the present suit against the defendants for declaration, permanent and mandatory injunction.
3. The defendant no. 1 has contested the present suit by filing written statement. In order to defend the present suit, the defendant no. 1 have inter-alia pleaded in its written statement that as per record available with the defendant no. 1, the plaintiff no. 2 Society named "Hankuk Budhist Society" was registered with the defendant no. 1, the Registrar of Societies on 13.09.1991 vide Registration no.
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies signed by
VARUN
Page No.6 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA
CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26
17:09:02
+0530
S-22187 with following seven founder members, namely, Sh. Hyeon Dong Hwa, Sh. Kim Min Hee, Sh. Jong Woo Kim, Sh. Ram Shankar Tripathi, Sh. In Cheol Choi, Sh. Wannadhaza and Sh. Park Jin Sung; that out of the abovestated seven members, four members are still alive as per status; that as per record available with the defendant no. 1, no information available that the plaintiff no. 1 was elected as the President of the Society on 15.12.2006 and no annual list of Governing body of the plaintiff no. 2 Society was filed up to 2010 which is mandatory under Section 4 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860; that a notice dated 24.11.2010 was issued under Section 4 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 with the direction to submit year-wise annual list of the Governing Body of the plaintiff no. 2 Society along with penalty of Rs.50/- each year and the same was sent to the registered address of the plaintiff no. 2 Society by post; that in respect of the aforesaid notice, Mr. Jong Woo Kim, Secretary of the Society submitted annual list of Governing Body on 07.10.2011 from 1999 to 2011 with late fee Rs.1,000/- vide receipt no. 18149/1455; that there are two groups claiming to have filed list of Governing Body of the plaintiff no. 2 Society for the year, 2013-2014 and opportunity of hearing was provided by issuing notices to Mr. Jong Woo Kim ad Mr. Lallan Yadav vide notices dated 10.02.2014, 14.03.2014, 24.04.2014 and 12.05.2014; that Mr. Lallan Yadav group did not put in their appearances in spite of having received notices; that the original founder members of the society including Mr. Jong Woo Kim put in their appearance in person before the defendant no. 1, Registrar of Societies with original documents available and submitted the documents on the last date of hearing i.e. 20.05.2014; that upon Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN Page No.7 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:09:09
+0530
checking the material available on record in the office of the defendant no. 1 and verification of original documents produced by the members of the society, the certified list of Governing Body for the year, 2014 was issued; that the representation dated 09.07.2014 was duly processed and it was found that the complainant has no locus standi as the matter had been perused and a detailed order dated 17.06.2014 was passed after giving opportunities of hearing to all the concerned parties; that as per the judgment passed by Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in " Sri Ram Laxmi Narain Marvari Hindu Vs. Assistant Registrar" 2000 (3) AWC 1955, the defendant no. 1 has jurisdiction; that the suit of the plaintiffs is liable to be dismissed on the ground of the maintainability as the plaintiffs have not approached the Hon'ble court with clean hands.
4. The defendant no. 25 and 8 have contested the present suit by filing their joint written statement. In order to defend the present suit, the defendant no. 25 and 8 have inter-alia pleaded in their written statement that the Hankuk Budhist Society was duly registered at the defendant no. 1 wherein there were seven founder members; that out of these seven members, three are no more while four founder members are still alive, namely, Sh. Hyeon Dong Hwa, Sh. Jong Woo Kim, Sh. Ram Shankar Tripathi and Sh. Wannadhaza; that as per Rule 10 of the Article of Association of the Society, it is mandatory that the Governing Body's strength would be at least eight members whereas there were merely seven founder-members of the society at the beginning; that General Body Meeting held on 23.09.1991, two new members, namely, Sri Umesh Kumar and Lobsang Shedh were inducted as members of Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies Digitally signed by VARUN Page No.8 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:09:16 +0530 the society and were included in the Governing Body of the society; that the society purchased a piece of land in Bodh Gaya, Gaya, Bihar by way of registered Sale Deed through its founders namely, Sh. Hyeon Dongh Hwa, the defendant no. 2 and Sri Ram Shankar Tripathi and had constructed a temple of Lord Buddha; that the society employed a Korean citizen, namely, Sh. Kim Chong Chul, the plaintiff no. 1 as priest; that the plaintiff no. 1 was never ever member of the Society at all and on collusion/conspiracy with other local people, he himself impersonated as the President of the Society; the plaintiff no. 1 had sold out a piece of land to his own man vide a registered Sale Deed dated 07.04.2010; that the Vice President of the society from 01.04.1999 to 31.03.2012 was Sri Umesh Kumar and he resigned from the society under the threat of being killed by the plaintiff no. 1 and his men on 28.01.2012; that having known that the plaintiff no. 1 men had transferred piece of land by way of forged Sale Deed, the Hankuk Budhist Society filed a title suit against the plaintiff no.1 and his men and Sri Umesh Kumar had lodged a complaint case against the plaintiff no. 1 and others u/s 406/420/468/471/34 and 120(B) IPC; that on 29.12.2010, the then Vice-President, Sri Umesh Kumar visited the Korea Temple of Society for supervision where he found that the plaintiff no. 1 and his men were attempting to take possession on the property of the society; that he protested and in course of which his ATM Card, Cheque Book and some cash and other articles were taken by the plaintiff no. 1 and his men; that Sri Umesh had reported the matter to police and also filed an informatory petition in the court of CJM, Gaya; that Hankuk Budhist Society through its Secretary i.e. the Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN Page No.9 of 54 CHANDRA VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:09:21
+0530
defendant no. 4 filed another title suit against the plaintiff no. 1 and others for restraining them to not further sell the land of the society; that the plaintiff no. 1 had appointed one Sri Bhalu Manjhi as imposter Secretary of Hankuk Budhist Society and executed another Sale Deed falsely transferring another piece of land of the society in one of their men viz., Sri Om Prakash; that Sri Bhalu Manjhi was never a member of the society at all; that a show cause dated 24.11.2010 was issued by the defendant no. 1 i.e. by the Office of the Commissioner of Industries, New Delhi to the defendant no. 2 for non-compliance of the provision of Section 4 of the Society Registration Act, 1860 and the said notice was received by the defendant no. 2 on 24.12.2010; that in respect of the aforesaid notice, the defendant no. 2 and the defendant no. 4 of the society submitted show cause as well as list of Governing Body of the Society since 1991 to 31.03.2011; that the society was fined for delay in submitting the said List of Governing Body and accordingly, the society paid Rs.1,000/- as fine for the same on 07.01.2011; that on 19.02.2011, the plaintiff no. 1 forcefully entered into the temple on the land of the society armed with country made pistol to harm the rightful members of the society and he caught red handed but he managed to escape; that the FIR was lodged against him u/s 25(1)(B) Arms Act; that the plaintiff had lodged a false case against the defendants and the case was investigated and was found false by the police; that 31.03.2011, Hankuk Budhist Society submitted its Governing Body List for the year 01.04.2011 to 31.03.2012 before the defendant no. 1; that the plaintiff no. 1 has personated one person, namely, Sri Lallan Yadav as Secretary of the society and got executed another Sale deed of Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN CHANDRA Page No.10 of 54 VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:09:28
+0530
portion of land of the society; that Sri Umesh Kumar, the Vice-
President and Sri Anirudh Kumar Singh, Treasurer of the Society gave written complaint against the plaintiff and his men to the defendant no. 1; that the defendant no. 2 and 4 submitted their written application before the defendant no. 1 to inform that the different persons seeking membership of the society and the identity proof of newly added members; that the defendant no. 5 lodged FIR against the plaintiff no. 1 and his men for committing crime of forgery; that the society filed its list of Governing body for the year, 2012-2013 along with resignation of Sri Umesh Kumar and Governing body for the year, and 2013-2014 before the defendant no. 1; that Hankuk Budhist Society submitted list of Governing Body for the year, 2014-2015 which is the same list as that of the year, 2013-2014 before the defendant no. 1; that on 10.02.2014, Hankuk Budhist Society through the defendant no. 2 to 10 received notice of the defendant no. 1 to appear on 20.02.2014 for hearing on the matter of certified true copy of the list of Governing Body of the society for the year, 2013 to 2014; that the defendant no. 6 had filed an affidavit thereby declaring that all the papers filed by Hankuk Budhist Society representing the Governing Body of the defendant no. 2 to 10 are genuine and contain his true and rightful signatures; that 17.06.2014, the defendant no. 1 passed administrative Order for issuance of Certified copy of the Governing Body of Hankuk Budhist Society containing the defendant no. 2 to 10; that thus, the plaintiffs are not entitled to any relief sought.
Digitally
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 signed by
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN
Page No.11 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA
CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26
17:09:34
+0530
5. The defendant no. 4 has contested the present suit by filing his written statement. In order to defend the present suit, the defendant no. 4 has inter-alia pleaded in his written statement that the plaintiffs have preferred a suit for declaration, permanent injunction and mandatory injunction assailing the order dated 17.06.2014 passed by the defendant no. 1 and inter alia also pertaining to the list of governing body of the plaintiff no. 2 and a permanent injunctions against the defendant no. 2 to 10 and a mandatory injunction against the defendant no. 1; that the plaintiffs have not only suppressed material facts and documents but also approached this Hon'ble court with unclean hands; that the very GPA dated 07.02.2011 filed and relied upon by the plaintiff no. 1 is not genuine; that the plaintiff have intentionally preferred the suit by withholding facts and material and consequentially deprive the defendants of their lawful rights and usurp the properties both immovable and movable of the Hankuk Buddhist Society; that the defendant no. 2 to 10 are the rightful members of the society, plaintiff no. 2 herein and the plaintiff no. 2 is a society duly registered with the office of the defendant no. 1 under the Societies Registration, Act, 1860 vide Registration no. s/22187 of 1991; that the plaintiff no. 1 was not duly elected President of the plaintiff no. 2society and Sh. Sayed Mustaque was duly appointed attorney of the plaintiff no. 1 vide GPA dated 07.11.2011; that Sh. Lallan Yadav is an imposter, whose claim of being a secretary of the plaintiff no. 2 is false and the plaintiff no. 2 is not correctly represented by Sh. Lallan Yadav; that the plaintiff no. 1 was employed as a priest by the society for looking after the temple; that the plaintiff no. 1 along with Sh. Lallan Yadav were acting in Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN Page No.12 of 54 CHANDRA VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:09:41
+0530
collusion to usurp the society, the plaintiff no. 2 herein and also fraudulently and illegally acquired the various immovable and movable properties owned by the society, the plaintiff no. 2; that the defendant no. 2 to 10 were lawfully elected members of the society and who constituted to be the governing body, treasurer, secretary and president of the plaintiff no. 2 society; that the defendant no. 2 is one of the founding members of the plaintiff no. 2 society and ever since the inception and registration of the plaintiff no. 2 society with the defendant no. 1, the defendant no. 2 has been the President of the plaintiff no. 2 society; that the plaintiff no. 1 is fraudulent person who conspired with his purported attorney namely, Sh. Sayed Mustaque, Sh. Lallan Yadav and others to illegally grab and usurp the plaintiff no. 2 and its various immovable and movable properties and the power of attorney placed on record is bogus and need not be relied upon; that the purported constituted attorney namely, Sh. Sayed Mustaque was taking undue advantage of the absence of the plaintiff no. 1 and was harrassing the defendants by filing fase and frivolous cases; that the defendant no. 1 absconded ever since he committed fraud and illegal transfer of the property of the society; the plaintiff no. 1 in collusion with Sh. Sayed Mustaque, Sh. Lallan Yadav and others executed a Sale Deed and transferring the land owned by the society and the said Sale Deed was challenged before the competent court and appropriate Civil and Criminal proceedings were initiated against the culprits; that 17.06.2014, the defendant no. 1 had passed an order in favour of the defendants and the plaintiff no. 1 had filed an appeal and not a mere representation whereby he assailed the order dated 17.06.2014 Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies Digitally signed by VARUN Page No.13 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:09:47 +0530 passed by the defendant no. 1 but the same was dismissed by the defendant no. 1; that the present suit filed on behalf of the plaintiffs is false and frivolous case and the same is liable to be dismissed.
6. The defendant no. 10 has contested the present suit by filing his written statement. In order to defend the present suit, the defendant no. 10 has inter-alia pleaded in his written statement that the plaintiffs have preferred a suit for declaration, permanent injunction and mandatory injunction assailing the order dated 17.06.2014 passed by the defendant no. 1 and inter alia also pertaining to the list of governing body of the plaintiff no. 2 and a permanent injunctions against the defendant no. 2 to 10 and a mandatory injunction against the defendant no. 1; that the plaintiffs have not only suppressed material facts and documents but also approached this Hon'ble court with unclean hands; that the very GPA dated 07.02.2011 filed and relied upon by the plaintiff no. 1 is not genuine; that the plaintiff have intentionally preferred the suit by withholding facts and material and consequentially deprive the defendants of their lawful rights and usurp the properties both immovable and movable of the Hankuk Buddhist Society; that the defendant no. 2 to 10 are the rightful members of the society, plaintiff no. 2 herein and the plaintiff no. 2 is a society duly registered with the office of the defendant no. 1 under the Societies Registration, Act, 1860 vide Registration no. s/22187 of 1991; that the plaintiff no. 1 was not duly elected President of the plaintiff no.
2society and Sh. Sayed Mustaque was duly appointed attorney of the plaintiff no. 1 vide GPA dated 07.11.2011; that Sh. Lallan Yadav is an imposter, whose claim of being a secretary of the Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies Digitally signed by VARUN Page No.14 of 54 CHANDRA VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:09:55
+0530
plaintiff no. 2 is false and the plaintiff no. 2 is not correctly represented by Sh. Lallan Yadav; that the plaintiff no. 1 was employed as a priest by the society for looking after the temple; that the plaintiff no. 1 along with Sh. Lallan Yadav were acting in collusion to usurp the society, the plaintiff no. 2 herein and also fraudulently and illegally acquired the various immovable and movable properties owned by the society, the plaintiff no. 2; that the defendant no. 2 to 10 were lawfully elected members of the society and who constituted to be the governing body, treasurer, secretary and president of the plaintiff no. 2 society; that the defendant no. 2 is one of the founding members of the plaintiff no. 2 society and ever since the inception and registration of the plaintiff no. 2 society with the defendant no. 1, the defendant no. 2 has been the President of the plaintiff no. 2 society; that the plaintiff no. 1 is fraudulent person who conspired with his purported attorney namely, Sh. Sayed Mustaque, Sh. Lallan Yadav and others to illegally grab and usurp the plaintiff no. 2 and its various immovable and movable properties and the power of attorney placed on record is bogus and need not be relied upon; that the purported constituted attorney namely, Sh. Sayed Mustaque was taking undue advantage of the absence of the plaintiff no. 1 and was harrassing the defendants by filing fase and frivolous cases; that the defendant no. 1 absconded ever since he committed fraud and illegal transfer of the property of the society; the plaintiff no. 1 in collusion with Sh. Sayed Mustaque, Sh. Lallan Yadav and others executed a Sale Deed and transferring the land owned by the society and the said Sale Deed was challenged before the competent court and appropriate Civil and Criminal Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies signed by Page No.15 of 54 VARUN VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:10:02 +0530 proceedings were initiated agaisnt the culprits; that 17.06.2014. the defendant no. 1 had passed an order in favour of the defendants and the plaintiff no. 1 had filed an appeal and not a mere representation whereby he assailed the order dated 17.06.2014 passed by the defendant no. 1 but the same was dismissed by the defendant no. 1; that the present suit filed on behalf of the plaintiffs is false and frivolous case and the same is liable to be dismissed.
7. The right of the plaintiffs to file replication qua the written statement of the defendants was closed vide order dated 09.04.2019 passed by the Ld. Predecessor of this court.
8. On the basis of the aforesaid pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by Ld. Predecessor of this court, on 09.04.2019:-
"1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for decree of declaration as prayed for ? OPP
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for decree of permanent injunction as prayed for? OPP
3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for decree of mandatory injunction as prayed for? OPP
4. Relief."
9. During trial of the present suit, three witnesses viz., PW1 Sh. Sayed Mustaque, PW2Sh. Gopal Singh and PW3, Sh. Ravinder Kumar, Record, LAC Office, South West Kapasera, New Delhi were examined in support of the case of the plaintiff and one witness viz., DW1, Sh. Lobsong Shedb was examined in support of Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN Page No.16 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:10:08
+0530
the case of the defendants. The testimonies of the said witnesses are not being discussed at this stage of this judgment, for the sake of brevity.
10. I had heard Sh. A. K. Pandey, Ld. Advocate for the plaintiffs and Sh. Manohar, Ld. Advocate for the defendant on 12.08.2025. Written arguments furnished on behalf of the plaintiff and the defendants on 02.08.2025 and 20.08.2025, respectively.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED:-
11. Ld. Advocate for the plaintiffs argued that the defendant no. 1 passed an order dated 17/06/2014 (Page no. 19 of the list of documents filed with the plaint) certifying the list of managing committee for the plaintiff no. 2 after detailed adjudication of the contentions of the defendant no. 2 group (defendant no. 2 is now already expired and deleted from the memo of parties). In para 2 of the aforesaid order, the defendant no. 1 duly noted that "On the perusal of the records it appears that there are two groups claiming to have filed the list of governing body of the society for the year 2013-14. Opportunity of appearing was provided by issuing notices to Mr. Jong Woo Kim and Mr Lallan Yadav...". Thus, while passing the order dated 17/06/2014, the defendant no. 1 was fully aware that there were two groups claiming to be the office bearers of the society, and hence, defendant no. 1 did not have any statutory power under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 to adjudicate the disputes by issuing notices to both the parties.
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies signed by Page No.17 of 54 VARUN VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:10:15 +0530
12. He argued that in para 21 of the aforesaid order, the defendant no. 1 himself was of the view that "...as per the provision of the Societies Registration Act, the commissioner of the societies has no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon as to which of the governing bodies in between two combating groups is true, correct and genuine one; but at the same time, when someone seeks certified copy of any document under Section 19 of the Societies Registration Act, this office is obliged to delivered the same on the basis of recourse to be maintained by the society. The certified list cannot be furnished mechanically." Further, in para 22 defendant no. 1 has held that "It has been held in catena of cases that if there is any doubt or dispute about a committee of management or its office bearers such dispute cannot be resolved by the registrar in exercise of his power under Section 3 and 4 of the Act, but the only course left open is civil court." The defendant no. 1 has wrongly placed its reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Allahbad High court in case titled as "Sriram Laxmi Narayan Marvari Hindu vs. Assistant Registrar" for the reason that Section 3(a) is not applicable in case of Delhi.
13. He argued that after receiving of the aforesaid order, the plaintiff no. 1 sent a representation dated 09/07/2014 (Page no 30 of the List of Documents filed with the plaint) under the heading "Appeal against the order dated 17/06/2014 to the Commissioner of Industries, Industries Deptt, Govt of NCT of Delhi, thereby raising his grievances against the aforesaid order passed by the defendant no. 1 since there are no statutory provisions under the Act to entertain the appeal, therefore, Commissioner of Industries did not Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN Page No.18 of 54 CHANDRA VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:10:21
+0530
pass any order on the representation dated 09/07/2014 made by Plaintiff no. 1. Thus, the plaintiffs have no other remedy available except to file the present suit before this Hon'ble Court thereby praying the aforesaid reliefs as stated in the plaint against the defendant no. 1 and the other defendants being shown as the office bearers of the plaintiff no. 2Society.
14. He argued that the defendant no. 1 appeared before this Hon'ble Court through Counsel and filed the Written Statement on 22/09/2014 and on the same date defendant no. 25 & 8 also filed their Written Statements. Vide order dated 18/09/2015, the Hon'ble Court directed defendant no. 3, 6, 7 & 9 were given last opportunity to give appearance or to file Written statements, failing which they will be proceeding ex-parte.
15. He argued that vide order dated 1/03/2016, the Hon'ble court has recorded that defendant no. 3, 4, 6, 7 & 9 have been proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 18/09/2015 for the reason that neither any Written statement was filed nor they had appeared within the stipulated period of 30 days. The Counsel or the aforesaid defendants sought time to file the application for setting aside ex-parte order, which was filed on 29/11/2016.
16. He argued that on 22/05/2018, the application qua defendant no. 3, 7 & 9 filed u/o XI Rule 7 for setting aside ex-parte order was withdrawn by the Counsel for defendant no. 2 to 10, and the application for setting aside ex-parte order against defendant no, 3, 7, 9 & 10 was dismissed as withdrawn and the application filed Digitally Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 signed by Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN Page No.19 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:10:28 +0530 by defendant no. 4 was allowed, meaning thereby the defendant no. 3, 7, 9 & 10 are still ex-parte, Further, nobody is appearing for defendant no. 1 since 18/11/2015. After filing the Written statement by defendant no. 24, 5 & 10, the Hon'ble court framed issues on 09/04/2019.
17. He argued that to prove its stand, the plaintiffs have examined 3 witnesses - PW1 is the attorney of the plaintiff no.1, PW2 is the secretary of the PW2 society and PW3 is the official of defendant no.1 office. PW1 has proved the case as stated in the plaint and during cross examination dated 14/10/2019, he has deposed that the name of founding members were told to me by plaintiff no. 1 and he also showed me the resignation of above founding members, including other founding members. However, no suggestion was made to PW1 by the counsel for defendants in respect of aforesaid deposition, which affirms the stand of the plaintiffs as taken in the plaint. Thus, plaintiff no. 1 and other members of the governing body had been managing the affairs of plaintiff no. 2society.
18. He argued that the PW3 had brought the letter dated 27/03/2014 showing the resubmission of resignation letters of the outgoing members by plaintiff in the office of defendant no. 1, as the same were found missing during the inspection of the files of the society maintained by defendant no. 1, officials. Further, PW3 had brought the submission of result of elections of the governing body of the society held on 14/01/2011 alongwith the list of the governing body for the year 2011-12. Thus the record clearly shows Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed by Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN Page No.20 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:10:34 +0530 that the plaintiff no. 1 had been managing the affairs of the plaintiff no. 2society and defendant no. 2 to 10 had no authority to get the certified copy after filing the same on the record.
19. He argued that the defendant no. 4 led his evidence as DW1 and during cross examination he had stated as under:-
"On 09/01/2025, the defendant no. 2 expired around 3-4 years ago, I have told this fact regarding the death of defendant no. 2 to my counsel today itself. Though I came to know about the death of defendant no. 2 in the same year when he had expired."
He again said "I don't have any documents to show that I have looked after the management of plaintiff no. 2society after the year 2005." On 08/07/2025 "It is correct that Sh Anirudh Kumar Singh and Sh. Anil Kumar as shown in the minutes of meeting dated 2013 are the practicing advocates at Gaya court in Bihar. I had been knowing the aforesaid persons since the year 2012. It is correct that both of them had been associated with Sh. PK Singh, Advocate at that time who was the advocate of defendant no. 2faction. I had been knowing Sh. Bhavesh Kumar and Smt. Satyawati Gupta as shown in the minutes of meeting 23/03/2013 Ex.DW1/X1) since the year 2012. It is correct that the plaintiff no. 1 got registered an FIR against me and another 6 persons bearing no. 39/11 dated 19/09/2011 in P.S-Bodh Gaya, Bihar u/s 341/342/352/379/448/34 IPC as shown in Doc- Mark A."
20. He argued that the deposition of DWI shows that the defendants no. 5, 7, 9 and Satyawati Kumari Gupta were not in the governing body of the society of defendant no. 2faction prior to Digitally signed Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 by VARUN Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies CHANDRA VARUN Page No.21 of 54 Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:10:40
+0530
year 2012however defendant no. 1 in para 7 of the impugned order dated 17/06/2014 had been falsely shown them to be inducted in the society in the year 1995 to 1998. Thus, in these circumstances it can be inferred that the aforesaid persons had got prepared the false and fabricated list of managing committee since the inception of the society and filed the same before defendant no. 1 office in the year 2011-12.
21. He argued that the defendant no. 1 failed to consider the list of managing committee filed by plaintiff no. 1 on record alongwith the minutes of meeting which have also been filed before this Hon'ble court while issuing certified list of managing committee to defendant no. 2 & 4. The representative of the plaintiffs appeared before the defendant no. 1 and had shown all the relevant documents opposing request of the defendant no. 2 &4 for issuing certified list of managing committee to them. But due to some malafide intention, the defendant no. 1 did not record the version of plaintiffs while passing the order dated 17/06/2014. Even defendant no. 1 failed to appear before this Hon'ble court as a witness and hence question relating to the aforesaid aspect could not be put to him. Though, he was not authorised for conducting adjudication in case of a dispute regarding the. governing body of plaintiff no. 2 society.
22. Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case titled as " Sarva Deshik Arya Pratinidhi vs. The Registrar of the Societies & ors. ", CW no.
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN
CHANDRA
Page No.22 of 54 VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:10:45
+0530
2369/95 decided on 03/10/1997 has held in para 6 of the judgment as under:
"6. we have gone through the provision of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and there is no doubt and We accept the arguments of Ld Counsel for the petitioner that the Registrar the Asst. Registrar has no Or jurisdiction under the act to issue the impugned directions. The arguments of Mr. K. Saini that the registrar has got power to issue the directions as contained in letters dated 07/06/1995, 09/06/1995 and 13/06/1995 is without any force. Any authority exercising power under a particular statute could trace its power only through the provisions of the statute, if the particular Act does not give any power to an authority, any act done or performed by that authority will be without jurisdiction."
23. He argued that in view of the aforesaid submission the plaintiffs are entitled for the decree of declaration thereby declaring the order dated 17/06/2014 passed by defendant no. 1 as illegal, null and void, non-est in law, without jurisdiction and hence cannot be acted upon.
24. He argued that after getting the aforesaid declaration in respect of order dated 17/06/2014, the defendant no. 2 to 10 have no authority to interfere in the management of plaintiff no. 2society and hence plaintiffs are entitled for decree of permanent injunction against the defendant nos. 2 to 10, restraining them from creating any hindrance or disturbance in the control and management of the plaintiff no. 2 society by plaintiff no. 1 and other members of the society.
Digitally
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 signed by
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN
Page No.23 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA
CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26
17:10:51
+0530
25. He argued that the plaintiffs have successfully proved that plaintiff no. 1 group has been running the affairs of the plaintiff no. 2society and hence, entitled for the decree of mandatory injunction directing the defendant no, 1 to issue certified list of governing body as filed by plaintiff no. 1 before the defendant no. 1.
26. Per Contra, Ld. Advocate for the defendant no. 2 to 10 argued that the present suit was filed by the plaintiff seeking the relief of declaration, permanent injunction and mandatory injunction. The written statements were filed by the different defendants. However, the right of the plaintiff to file replication was closed by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 09.04.2019.
27. He argued that this Hon'ble Court was pleased to frame the issues in the present suit vide order dated 09.04.2019. Before proceeding to issue wise submissions, the following submissions concerning the maintainability of the suit deserve to be considered -
Issues regarding the maintainability of the suit Although, no specific issue has been framed with respect to maintainability of the suit, however, given the nature of the issues which have been framed, the issue with respect to maintainability is inherent in the issues which have already been framed.
Suit has no authorization validly instituted i.e. without proper authorization Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed by Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN Page No.24 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:10:56 +0530
28. He argued that the plaintiff no. 1 in the instant suit is stated to be Mr. Kim Chong Chul, who has been arrayed as president of the Hankuk Buddhist Society [hereinafter referred to as the society]. The suit has been instituted, signed and verified under the signatures of alleged attorney, namely, Syed Mustaq. In support of the authorisation, General power of attorney dated 07.02,2011 has been enclosed. The defendants have, in their written statement, specifically pleaded that he suit has not been genuinely instituted and that the general power of attorney dated 07.02,2011 is not genuine and that the suit has been preferred for ulterior motives and to usurp the properties belonging to the society and had specifically stated that the plaintiff be put to strict proof with respect to genuineness of the alleged power of attorney. Hence, it was incumbent upon the plaintiff to have proved that the suit was validly instituted in the name of plaintiff no.1 by the Attorney holder.
29. He argued that a bare perusal of the General Power of Attorney dated 07.02.2011 [Ex -PW1/A] would reveal that the same has been perfectly executed in the year 2011, whereas the cause of action to file the present suit has risen, even as per the paragraph no. 12 of the plaint, in the year 2014. It is submitted that this power of attorney dated 07.11.2011, does not in any manner authorise the power of attorney holder to institute the present suit. There is no reference in the alleged GPA dated 07.02.2011 to the subject matter of the instant suit, which happens to be the order dated 17.06.2014 passed by the defendant, registrar of societies. It is submitted that the relief sought in the suit are primary based on Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN CHANDRA Page No.25 of 54 VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:11:02
+0530
the relief against the order dated 17.06.2014 passed by the Registrar of Societies. It is submitted that there is no reference and there could not have been any reference to the order dated 17.6.2014 in the year 2011, and hence, any such claim that the power of attorney holder was authorised to institute, the present suit is not tenable.
30. He argued that there is no clause even in the said GPA, Ex-PW1/A authorising the power of attorney holder to institute a suit against the defendants with respect to the order passed by the office of sub-registrar. Further, the said GPA has been apparently executed by plaintiff no. 1, in the capacity of the President of the society and the same is even on the letterhead of the society. It is submitted that the President of the society cannot delegate his powers as President of the society and authorised somebody else to act on his behalf without their being any such provision in the constitution/bylaws of the society. It is argued that by giving blanket authorisation to the power of attorney holder, as stated in clause 1, to manage, control look after all the affairs in respect of the properties registered in the name of the society is against the Constitution of the society and no office bearers, even president, cannot delegate and vest such powers with respect to the society or the post of the President by way of power of attorney to someone else. Such illegal delegation clearly comes out in cross examination dated 14.10.2019 of PW1 where he stated that after the year 2011, the work of Hankuk Budhist Society was being looked by myself and Lallan Yaday on behalf of plaintiff no. 1. It is argued that if anyone is not capable of performing the duties of the post of president or of any other office of the society, then, in that event, Digitally Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 signed by Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN Page No.26 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:11:08 +0530 such an office bearer can no longer continue in the office and must resign from the post. It is argued that delegation of powers of the post is not contemplated by the bylaws/constitution of the society.
31. He argued that the alleged general power of attorney was executed in the year 2011 why the plaintiff no. 1 claiming himself to be the President of the society. It is argued that as per the bylaws of the society, which is Exhibit PW2/A clause 11 at page number 221 provides that the office bearers and members shall be elected in the annual meeting of the general body for a period of two years by secret papers. Hence, even if any such authorisation was given by the plaintiff no. 1 while he was alleged president of the Society in the year 2011, the said power of attorney cannot be stated to have remained as valid in the year 2014. It is argued that the scope of the suit is beyond the alleged GPA. The GPA has not been executed by the plaintiff no.1, and as such the present suit has not been valid instituted by the attorney holder.
32. He argued that the plaintiff no. 2 is stated to be the society. It is submitted that as per Section 6 of the Societies Registration Act and as per clause 20 of the bylaws of the society, as are available in Exhibit PW2/A at page number 225, it is provided that the society can sue or be sued in its name through the secretary or President. In the instant case, pleadings have been signed on behalf of the plaintiff no. 2 by Lallan Yadav, claiming him to be the secretary of the society. It is argued that there is no material placed on record to substantiate that Shri Lallan Yadav who had filed the suit on behalf of the society was its validly elected secretary. In Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed by Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN Page No.27 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:11:15 +0530 absence of a validly elected secretary, instituting a suit on behalf of the society, the suit cannot be said to be validly instituted. It is further argued that the resolution dated 01/02.2017 placed on record in this regard is signed by none else, but the said Lal Yadav himself.
33. He argued that the issue deserves to be dismissed on the account of it, not being valid instituted by authorised persons in the name of the plaintiff stated in the array of parties.
34. He argued that that plaintiff no. 1 has not participated in Society affairs since February 2011, a fact confirmed by plaintiff's own witness (PW1), who further admitted that he lacks personal knowledge of relevant society events and relied on "what was told by plaintiff no. 1". It is further stated that PW1 in his cross examination dated 14.10.2019 that after the incident of 18,02.2011, plaintiff no. 1 left Bodh Gaya and he did not know about his whereabouts at that time. That he does not remember through whom he came to knowledge about the order dated 17.06.2016. That he does not know the address of plaintiff no. 1 in South Korea:
That he does not know the email ID of plaintiff no. 1. Hence, it is clear that PW1 personally does not have knowledge about the affairs of the society and even about the plaintiff no. 1.
35. He argued that PW2 is not even the valid member of the society. PW2 mentioned in his cross examination dated 14.10.2019 that I had not paid any subscription money for becoming the member of the society. It is pertinent to mention that PW2 did not Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies signed by Page No.28 of 54 VARUN VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:11:21 +0530 have any knowledge of events of society. PW2 said that have no knowledge of the order dated 17.06:2014 passed by defendant no.
1. He had deposited that he does not know since when plaintiff no. 1 was the member of the said Society plaintiff no. 1 never returned to India since the year 2012. That he does not remember the month of the year 2012 when plaintiff no.1 left India. That he does not know the address of plaintiff no.1 in South Korea. That he had never talked nor exchanged any correspondence with plaintiff no.1.
The he has been authorized by the members of society to represent plaintiff no. 1 also in the present matter. PW2 joined the plaintiff no. 2 Society only in 2016 (years after the disputed events), admitted lack of direct knowledge of the 2013-14 events, and brought no original documentation to court. PW2 could not even confirm basic facts about governing body compositions prior to his own induction, nor did he produce any resignation letters or direct evidence of irregularity in elections.
36. He argued that the issue number one pertains to the relief of declaration as has been sought by the plaintiff in para A and B of the prayer clause. As prayer is concerned, the plaintiff has declaration of the order dated 17.06.2014, as illegal, null and void, In this regard, it is submitted that a perusal of the said order Exhibit PW1/D reveals that said order is nothing but a speaking administrative order vide which no rights of the parties are impacted in any manner. They said order has decided the issue pertaining to the request received by the office for issuing the certified list of governing body of the society for financial year 2013-14. Para four on internal page number two of the order dated Digitally Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 signed by Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN Page No.29 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:11:27 +0530 17.06.2014 deserves to be reproduced here, and the same reads as under:-
"4. At the outside, it is made clear that this is not an order of adjudication of any disputes, civil or criminal between the parties. This order is limited to checking of material available on record in this office and verification of original documents produced by the members of the society and thereafter order for issue of list of governing body for the FY 2013-14."
37. The impugned order further record in paragraph number 21 as under:-
"21. Under the above mentioned factual horizon, it has been requested to issue certified copy of the governing body of the society for year 2013- 2014 by Mr Jong Kim. As per provisions of the societies registration act, the commissioner of the societies has no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon as to which of the recovering bodies in between two competing groups is true, correct and genuine one, but at the same time, when someone seeks certified copy of any document under section 19 of the societies registration act, this office is obliged to deliver the same on the basis of the records to be maintained by the society. The certified list cannot be furnished mechanically."
38. He argued that it is clear that the scope of order was not at all with respect to adjudication of any disputes or rights of the parties. The defendants submit that the order has not affected the rights of plaintiff or any of the parties to the suit whatsoever. Further, the Ld. Registrar of Societies was conscious that it was not deciding any of the rights of the parties and that it had no jurisdiction to do so. The order is only confined to provide the Digitally Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 signed by Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN Page No.30 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:11:46 +0530 certified copy of the list of governing bodies. In the instant case, the registrar has undertaken the exercise only for the purposes of satisfying himself as to which copy out of the two friend, list of governing bodies, submitted by two factions of the society, is to be furnished when the certified copy of the government body is sought. Hence, no right, title or interest of the plaintiffs has been adversely affected by the order dated 17.6.2014.
39. He argued that that the order dated 17.6.2014 is purely an administrative order to a certain as to certified Copy of which of the list is to be issued in response to the application for certified copy and the same does not affect the rights of the parties in any manner, as has already been specifically stated in the said order itself. Hence, a suit seeking declaration in this regard is unwarranted, the said declaration is not with respect to any status, right or title of the parties and as such as hit by section 34 Specific Relief Act, which provides that declaration can only be with respect to a status, title, or character of a party and the instant suit in so far as declaration is concerned not maintainable.
40. He argued that the Ld. Sub Registrar has passed the said administrative order after following the principles of natural justice and after giving due opportunities of being heard to all concerned and thereafter by passing a decent order. As has been noted in para 3 of the order, Mr Lallan Yadav's group did not put in appearance, in spite of having received notices, and on the other hand, the defendant had furnished the original documents available with them to show that the defendant and their group had always been Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed by Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN Page No.31 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:11:51 +0530 in possession of not only the original certificate of registration, original memorandum, original rules and regulations, as well as minutes of meeting, the intimation which were earlier given to the registrar of societies during previous years. On being satisfied, the Ld. Registrar had decided to accept the list of governing body from the defendant site and had issued the certified copy of the list furnished by them.
41. He argued that plaintiff has failed to point out any infirmities in the said order on merits and has failed to even plead that the facts stated in the said order are factually, incorrect, let alone any evidence led to the contrary. In such an event, there is no reason to declare the order dated 17.06.2014 as illegal. Regards the relief of declaration contained in para B of the prayer clause is concerned, it is submitted that there is no or factual basis set up in the plaint which entitled the plaintiff to the declaration sort by them in this paragraph It is submitted that to get a decree of declaration to the effect that a particular list of governing body of society is valid, it is incumbent upon the plaintiff is seeking such a relief to plead all the necessary facts which would make Such a governing body, legal, and valid. The same would require the plaintiff to prove as to how the members mentioned in the said list of the governing body came to be validly elected, facts as to the date of election, that the election was conducted as per the bylaws of the society, in the annual general meeting of the general body, with the required quorum, It is, however, submitted that the plaint is totally silent about these material facts. It is submitted that in absence of the plaintiffs pleading and proving that there was a Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies signed by VARUN Page No.32 of 54 CHANDRA VARUN CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:11:56 +0530 valid election held, in which the persons who were the members of the society had participated and were duly elected and that the election was conducted in an annual general meeting of the general body with requisite quorum, it cannot be said that the list of governing body filed by the plaintiff number 1 to control and manage the society is a valid legal list.
42. He argued that the governing body submitted by the plaintiff no. 1 comprises of a number of persons, and it is strange to see that none of such persons have even bothered to approach the court and rather, the plaintiff has even failed to implied them as a party to the suit. In other words, the plaintiff no. 1 is seeking validity of the governing body even in respect of the persons who are not there before the court. The parties, whose rights are likely to be affected by adjudication of a suit ought to have been made unnecessary party in the present suit.
43. He argued that that as per the bylaws of the society, as stated in the clause 12 of the bylaws, the term of the governing body is two years. The plaintiff has failed to plead or prove as to the date when the alleged election electing the plaintiff no. 1 was held. This assumes importance because the order dated 17.6.2014 pertains to the list of governing body for the financial year 2013-
14, and the said order has lost its significance, if at all it had some, with the flux of time. The question as to declaration of the valid governing body of the society has become academic and redundant with the passage of time and the tenure of either of the rival governing bodies would have come to an end after two years.
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN
Page No.33 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA
Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:12:02
+0530
Hence, the prayer sought by the plaintiff cannot be granted as the same would have the effect of validating an alleged governing body, in violation of the bylaws of the society.
44. He argued that that the facts pleaded in the suit have not been proved by the plaintiff witnesses. It is settled legal proposition, that the power of attorney holder is not authorised to depose on behalf of the principal. The power of attorney holder can only deposit only with respect to the facts in his personal knowledge.
45. He argued that to get a decree of injunction to restrain the defendants, plaintiffs have to plead that plaintiffs are controlling the management of the plaintiff no. 2 society. It is necessary to draw the attention of this Hon'ble Court towards the relevant averments of para 4 of the plaint which states:-
"The plaintiff no. 1 apprehending danger to his life, left Bodh Gaya on that day itself.
Thereafter, the groups led by Sh. Umesh Kumar took over the possession of the society premises."
46. He argued that these pleadings clearly shows that plaintiff no. 1 had left the society premises and the other faction had taken control over possession of the society premises. Even if, we presume the plaint to be true, such admission in the plaint clearly shows that plaintiff was not in the possession and control over the premises society, its premises and management. It is incumbent upon the plaintiff is seeking such relief to plead all the necessary facts which would make such a plaintiffs governing body legal, and Digitally Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 signed by Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN Page No.34 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:12:07 +0530 valid. The same would require the plaintiff to prove as to how the members mentioned in the said list of the governing body came to be validly elected, facts as to the date of election, that the election was conducted as per the bylaws of the society, in the annual general meeting of the general body, with the required quorum. It is, however, submitted that the plaint did not disclose about these material facts. It is submitted that in absence of the plaintiffs pleading and proving that there was a proper control and management over the society and valid election held, in which the persons who were the members of the society had participated and were duly elected and that the election was conducted in an annual general meeting of the general body with requisite quorum, it cannot be said that the list of governing body filed by the plaintiff no. 1 to control and manage the society is a valid legal list. For permanent injunction, the plaintiff must establish continuing, enforceable right and a real threat of interference. PW2brought as an allegedly active member, confessed ignorance of period and terms of governing bodies, did not know about the impugned order, and had never even met Plaintiff No. 1. These admissions destroy any suggestion that the society suffers ongoing injury or threat at defendants's hands. Hence, the plaintiff is not entitled for the relief for permanent injunction.
47. He argued that The plaintiff is not entitled for the relief for mandatory injunction since failed to mention specific pleadings which are required and necessitated for the mandatory injunction. Plaintiff is not entitled to consequential relief if the main or primary relief sought in a suit is not granted. Consequential relief is Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN Page No.35 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:12:12
+0530
considered secondary and dependent on the success of the main relief, If the court denies the primary relief, it logically follows that any relief dependent on it cannot be granted either.
48. He argued that the plaintiff does not deserve to get the relief of mandatory injunction to obtain certified copy because Ld. Registrar after giving due opportunities of being heard to all concerned and thereafter passed a decent order. As has been noted in para 3 of the order, Mr Lallan Yadav's group did not put in appearance, in spite of having received notices, and on the other hand, the defendant had furnished the original documents available with them to show that the defendant and their group had always been in possession of not only the original certificate of registration, original memorandum, original rules and regulations, as well as minutes of meeting, the intimation which were earlier given to the registrar of societies during previous years. On being satisfied, the Ld. Registrar had decided to accept the list of governing body from the defendant site and had issued the certified copy of the list furnished by them.
49. Ld. Advocate for the defendants relied upon the following judgments i.e. "Man Kaur (Dead) by Lrs v. Hartar Singh Sangha "
MANU/SC/0789/2010 passed by the Apex court, " Shambhu Dutt Shastri v. State of Rajasthan", 1986 2 WLN 713 (Raj), "Ram Prasad v. Hari Narain" AIR 1998 Raj 185, "Vidhyadhar v. Manikrao" 1999(3) SCC 573 and "Bachhaj Nahar v. Nilima Mandal & Ors.," AIR 2009 SC 1103.
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies Digitally signed
Page No.36 of 54 by VARUN
VARUN CHANDRA
CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26
17:12:17 +0530
50. The issue wise findings, in this case, are as follows:-
ISSUE NO.1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled for decree of declaration as prayed for? OPP
51. In order to prove their respective cases qua this issue, three witnesses viz., PW1 Sh. Sayed Mustaque, PW2Sh. Gopal Singh and PW3, Sh. Ravinder Kumar, Record, LAC Office, South West Kapasera, New Delhi were examined in support of the case of the plaintiff.
52. During examination in chief, PW1, Sh. Sayed Mustaque has deposed in line with the plaint of this suit and tendered in evidence documents viz., copy of GPA, Ex.PW1/A(OSR); copy of resolution dated 11.07.2014, Mark E; copy of minutes of meeting dated 15.12.2006, Mark C; copy of order dated 17.06.2014, Ex.PW1/D; copy of representation dated 09.07.2014, Mark D; copy of FIR dated 19.02.2011, Mark A and copy of annual list of governing body, Mark B(Colly).
53. During examination in chief, PW2Sh. Gopal Singh has deposed in line with the plaint of this suit and tendered in evidence documents viz., bye-laws of society, Ex.PW2/A(OSR); copy of resolution dated 01.02.2017, Ex.PW2/B(OSR) and documents exhibited by PW1 i.e. Mark A, Mark B(Colly), Mark C, Mark D and Ex.PW1/D. Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN CHANDRA Page No.37 of 54 VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:12:22
+0530
54. During examination in chief, PW3, Sh. Ravinder Kumar, Record, LAC Office, South West Kapasera, New Delhi had tendered the documents viz., certified copy of the letter dated 27.03.2014, Ex.PW3/A and certified copy of the letter dated 07.02.2011, Ex.PW3/B(Colly).
55. In order to prove his respective case qua this issue, one witness viz., DW1, Sh. Lobsong Shedb was examined in support of the case of the defendants.
56. During examination in chief, DW1, Sh. Lobsong Shedb has deposed in line with the plaint of this suit and tendered his evidence by way of affidavit which Ex.DW1/1. During the cross-
examination of DW1, Sh. Lobsong Shedb, one document was exhibited i.e. copy of minutes of meeting for the year, 2013-2014 as Ex.DW1/X1(OSR).
57. In respect of this issue, it is to be seen that the order of Ld. Registrar dated 17.06.2014 was made within the four walls of administrative capacity or was it akin to a declaration of legality of member committee of the defendant's faction and that it is to be seen whether the plaintiffs have been able to showcase sufficient evidence so much so that the members committee of the plaintiffs' faction can be declared as rightful managers of the plaintiff no. 2 society.
58. Perusal of the order dated 17.06.2014 reflects that the said order mentions that notices were sent to both factions on the Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN Page No.38 of 54 CHANDRA VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:12:27
+0530
application furnished before the Ld. Registrar by the defendant's faction for the issuance of certified copy of list of Governing bodies; and on due deliver of same, Ld. Registrar proceeded given non-appearance of the plaintiff's faction.
59. The order dated 17.06.2014 discusses on following contentions which are being placed in brief; history of documentation on behalf of the defendant's faction is discussed; Ld. Registrar mentioned that non-compliance under Section 4 of Societies of Registration Act, 1860 was noticed and showcause notice were issued, against which defendant's faction showed up with penalty paid and requisite documentation; no proper documentation along with penalty paid was filed on behalf of the plaintiff's faction; vide para 15, Ld. Registrar mentions that plethora of legal proceedings are pending between rival factions; findings as to the lacunae on behalf of documentation of plaintiff's faction has been mentioned qua list of governing body filed for the year, 2011-12; it has been noted by the Ld. Registrar that in the event there is a dispute, he cannot resolve the same under Section 3 or 4; he placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court "Sri Ram Laxmi Narain Marvari Hindu Vs. Assistant Registrar" 2000 (3) AWC 1955 and upon its persuasive value the stated dispute was not referred to the prescribed authority. Lastly, by virtue of Section 19 of the Societies Registration Act 1860, he ordered certified copy of the Governing body for the FY 2013-14 to be issued to Mr. Hyeon Dong Hwa and Mr. Jong Woo Kim for the Hankuk Budhist Society, i.e. plaintiff no. 2 society.
Digitally
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 signed by
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN
Page No.39 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA
CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26
17:12:32
+0530
60. While the contentions of both the parties have been descriptively stated, in brief, the plaintiffs have argued that the order dated 17.06.2014 is non-est, illegal as the Ld. Registrar had foreknowledge of dispute of two factions and the present order has been passed outside the authority available to the Ld. Registrar. He has contested the reliance of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in case "Sri Ram Laxmi Narain Marvari Hindu Vs. Assistant Registrar" 2000 (3) AWC 1955 stating that Section 3A SRA 1980 is not applicable in the case of Union Territory of Delhi. He argued that the Ld. Registrar failed to consider the list of managing committee furnished on behalf of the plaintiffs' faction; and placed reliance of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case of "Sarva Deshik Arya Pratinidhi vs. The Registrar of the Societies & ors.", CW no. 2369/95 decided on 03/10/1997. On the other hand, defendants have argued that ordered dated 17.06.2014 is nothing but a speaking administrative order vide which no rights of the parties are impacted in any manner. It has been stated that the scope of the order is not respect to the adjudication of any disputes or rights of the parties and the Ld. Registrar has specifically mentioned so while passing the order under Section 19 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860; and thusly, the section 34 specific relief act is not attracted as declaration can only be with respect to the status, title or character of a party.
61. To understand the nature of the order dated 17.06.2014 passed by the Ld. Registrar, following sections of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 needs to be perused.
Digitally
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 signed by
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN
Page No.40 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA
CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26
17:12:37
+0530
62. Section 3 of Societies Registration Act, 1860 reads as :-
"3. Registration and fees -
Upon such memorandum and certified copy being filed, the Registrar shall certify under his hand that the society is registered under this Act. There shall be paid to the Registrar for every such registration a fee of fifty rupees, or such smaller fees as 4[the State Government] may, from time to time, direct; and all fees so paid shall be accounted for to 4[the state Government".
63. Section 4 of Societies Registration Act, 1860 reads as :-
"4. Annual list of managing body to be filed - Once in every year, on or before the fourteenth day succeeding the day on which, according to the rules of the society, the annual general meeting of the society is held, or , if the rules do not provide for an annual general meeting, in the month of January, a list shall be filed with the Registrar of Joint-stock Companies, of the names, addresses and occupations of the to Governors, council, directors, committee, or other governing body then entrusted with the management of the affairs of the society."
64. Section 19 of Societies Registration Act, 1860 reads as :-
"19. Inspection of documents -
Any person may inspect all documents filed with the Registrar under this Act on payment of a fee of one rupee for each inspection; and any person may require a copy or extract of any document or any part of any document, to be certified by the registrar, on payment of two annas for every hundred words of such copy or extract; and such certified copy shall be prima facie evidence of the matters therein contained in all legal proceedings whatever."
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN CHANDRA Page No.41 of 54 VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:12:43
+0530
65. Perusal of the provisions of the aforementioned Act reflects that no amendment qua Section 3A was made for the applicability of the act in the Union Territory of Delhi, which is to say, a Society registered vide Section 3 need not file for a renewal of registration after a period of two years. That is further to say that once a society is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, the registration stands in perpetuity until exhausted/cancelled.
66. The certification provided by the Ld. Registrar in such a case would give extension to the list of Governing bodies as the designated governing body vide Section 16 of the Act, which reads as:-
"16. Governing body defined -
The governing body of the society shall be the governors, council, directors, committee, trustees or other body to whom by the rules and regulations of the society the management of its affairs is entrusted."
67. Perusal of Section 19 as placed before reflects that no such authority has been granted to the Ld. Registrar as the provision states for inspection and requisition of documents filed with the Ld. Registrar; also the term "certified copies" have been regarded to hold prima facie evidence of the matters therein contained in all legal proceedings whatsoever.
68. The reliance of the Ld. Registrar upon the judgment of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court "Sri Ram Laxmi Narain Marvari Hindu Vs. Assistant Registrar" 2000 (3) AWC 1955 has been Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies signed by Page No.42 of 54 VARUN VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:12:51 +0530 misplaced as the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court vide para 10 and 11 of the judgment had also held that :-
"10. In Kranti Kumar Chaturvedi and others v. District Inspector of Schools Kanpur and others, 1995 (3) ESC 166 (All), a Division Bench of this Court has clearly ruled that Section 25 of the Act would be attracted If 'there is dispute between two rival parties each of whom is claiming to be validly elected body' and that the Section 'is also attracted when a party challenges the legality or otherwise of the election of particular act of office-bearer of the Society on the grounds enumerated in Section 25 of the Act.' The Division Bench has further ruled that Section 25 would be attracted to a dispute of the nature aforesaid, 'only when there is no dispute in respect of registration of Society or its renewal of certificate of registration.' A reference may also be made to another decision of the Division Bench in Shambhu Kumar Tripathi v. Assistant Registrar. Firms, Socielies and Chits, AIR 1994 All 209, in which it was observed :
".....It is evident from Section 3A that renewal of the certificate of registration of a society is within the exclusive jurisdiction/ domain of the Registrar which term includes Assistant Registrar. Firms. Societies and Chits. The power to renew a certificate of registration being expressly and exclusively conferred upon the Registrar, the Registrar would be deemed to possess all, incidental and ancillary powers as may be considered necessary for an effective exercise of the power under Section 3A of the Act."
There are plethora of decisions delving on the consideration which would apply for invoking the powers by two independent authorities under Section 4 as well as Section 25 of the Act. It would be a mere tautology to refer all such Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed by VARUN Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies CHANDRA Page No.43 of 54 VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26 17:12:57 +0530 decisions. The law as it stands is that the Registrar has to take a workable administrative decision to recognize the newly constituted committee of management or its office-bearers so that smooth functioning of the Society is not hampered. This determination is. of course, subject to the ultimate decision by the civil court. Nevertheless, if a bona fide dispute or doubt with regard to the election of the rival committees of management or the office-bearers is raised, in that event the Registrar would keep his hands off and relieve himself by performing statutory duty of making a reference under Section 25 of the Act."
And;
"If the dispute raised by the petitioners is really bona fide, in that event, there is nothing to prevent them from approaching the Prescribed Authority to decide the dispute between the rival parties.11. The Assistant Registrar, respondent No. 1
got the authority to embark upon the enquiry and to pass order purporting to be under Section 4(1) of the Act pursuant to the order dated 3.3.2000 passed by this Court in Civil Misc. Writ No. 4943 of 2000. As a matter of fact, the Assistant Registrar was bound to pass an order in compliance with the direction of this Court. The impugned order indicates that the Assistant Registrar afforded a number of opportunities to the petitioners to place their point of view and produce supporting documents but for the reasons best known to the petitioners, they did not avail of the opportunity and allowed the matter to go against them. Since the matter is yet to be decided by the civil court, where the petitioners have laid Suit No. 19 of 2000, 1 would do better to refrain from making any observations touching the merits of the case lest Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN Page No.44 of 54 CHANDRA VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26 17:13:03 +0530 it may prejudice the civil court, one way or the other. There appears to be great force and substance in the submission that the petitioners cannot be permitted to rake up the controversy time and again before this Court, particularly, when civil court is seized of the matter. To say that the relief claimed before the civil court is merely for injunction, is nothing but moving in the same circle. Relief of injunction is to be granted or refused depending upon validity or otherwise of the election, as set up by the respondent No. 2 and which has been challenged by the petitioners. A finding has to be recorded by the trial court with regard to the validity or otherwise of the election before granting or refusing the order of injunction. Therefore, in substance, the controversy which has been raised in this petition as well as in the earlier Writ Petition No. 9390 of 2000 is similar to the controversy which has to be canvassed before and decided by the civil court in the pending Suit No. 19 of 2000, It is true that the impugned order dated 29.3.2000 has been passed after filing of Suit No. 19 of 2000 but the fact remains that the subsequent order which flows from the controversy raised in the Court can also be specifically challenged by making necessary amendment."
69. That is, in the event a valid dispute is raised before the Ld. Registrar then it upon him to refer the matter to the prescribed authority under the relevant act. Further, as he is obligated to only issue certified copy under Section 19 as stated by him, the final decision still rests upon the precribed/competent authority.
70. While Section 19 of the aforementioned Act specifically states for issuance of certified copy qua any document or extract of Digitally Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 signed by Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN Page No.45 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:13:08 +0530 any document filed before him, the question that whether such certified copy is akin to declaration of a Governing body based on a dispute of rival factions is to be answered. Given the factual matrix of the present case and that the society is to be registered under Section 3 and no provision for renewal of registration has been placed by the legislature for the Union Territory of Delhi; the court is of the opinion, that the answer to this question is in the affirmative. The Ld. Registrar while providing a certified copy for list of Governing body for plaintiff no. 2 society i.e. Hankuk Budhist Society delved in the process of certification of registration as he touched upon the list of Governing bodies filed between rival factions. Thereby, it can be stated that the Ld. Registrar stepped outside the purview of Section 19 and that the said order is nullity in the eyes of law.
71. The relief of declaration sought by the plaintiff is based on his claim that given the order of Ld. Registrar dated 17.06.2014 being illegal, null and void, non-est, without jurisdiction and cannot be acted upon; his factions members committee be declared as valid and legal.
72. The plaintiffs have argued qua the specific notion that given the illegality of the order, the plaintiffs have successfully proved that plaintiff no. 1 group has been running the affairs of the plaintiff no. 2 society. On the other hand, the defendants have argued that the present suit has been preferred without proper authorization and has not been validly instituted; that the power to prefer the suit as President of the plaintiff no. 2 society cannot be Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies signed by Page No.46 of 54 VARUN VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:13:13 +0530 delegated as same is not mentioned anywhere in bye-laws; that elections have to be conducted every two years and no proper election could be held by the plaintiff no. 1 group as the plaintiff no. 1 has left the territory of India admittedly in the year, 2011-12; that no proof/pleadings have been made by proper election held by the plaintiff no. 1 group as no facts as to date of election, election being conducted as per by-laws of society, annual general meeting of the General body with the required quorum; that members of the plaintiff no. 1 group have not been impleaded as a party in the present suit; lastly, witnesses brought forth by way of General Power of Attorney cannot depose on behalf of the plaintiff no. 1 and can only state to the facts in their personal knowledge.
73. To formulate a decision for the validity of Governing body by the member committee of the plaintiff no. 1 group, the bye-laws of the plaintiff no. 2 society needs to be perused. It is pertinent to mention that the an amendement of the memorandum of association of plaintiff no. 2 society was preferred, however, no evidence as to same being duly accepted and applied have been furnished before this court. In view of the same, the memorandum of association of the plaintiff no. 2 society will examined vide Ex.PW2/A.
74. Ex.PW2/A contains the memorandum of association having the aim and objectives, the list of body and specifically, rules and regulations of the plaintiff no. 2 society wherein it is specified that the admission of membership shall be made subject to subscription of an amount of Rs.100/- at the time of admission and a subscription of Rs.2,000/- per annum vide para 2. Para 3 contains Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN CHANDRA Page No.47 of 54 VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:13:18
+0530
the termination of membership wherein, the membership can be terminated by a no-confidence motion, upon death, upon non- payment of subscription continuously for three months from due date, upon written resignation and upon not attending three consecutive meetings of the general body without any intimation. It also contains the election and quorum vide para 11 wherein it is mentioned that the general body will elect the President and all the members and office bearers after a period of 2 years in its annual meeting. Also, it has been mentioned vide para 20 that society can sue and can be sued in its name through the Secretary of the President as per Section 6 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860.
75. The letter dated 04.03.2010 Ex.PW3/C(Colly) contains the admission of the plaintiff no. 1 himself that the penalty for the delay as imposed by the Ld. Registrar office will be paid, that is to say, have not been paid till the stated date, while submitting the list of Executive Council for the year 2009-10, 2008-2009, 2007-08 and 2006-07.
76. It is pertinent to mention that in the evidence of PW1/Sh Syed Mustaque, the authorized GPA holder on behalf of the plaintiff no. 1 admitted that plaintiff no. 1 never came back to India after the year, 2011. Also, he admitted that he had no personal knowledge as to the plaintiff no. 1 becoming the President in the year, 2006. He further admitted that the plaintiff no. 1 did not personally participate in any activity or work of the said society after February, 2011. He further pleaded ignorance qua knowledge of order dated 17.06.2014 of Ld. Registrar.
Digitally signedCivil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 by VARUN
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN CHANDRA
Page No.48 of 54
CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26
17:13:24 +0530
77. Further, the alleged secretary, PW2/Sh. Gopal Singh admitted of not paying any subscription fee for becoming the member of the society. He admitted to the fact of the plaintiff no. 1 never returning to India since the year, 2012. He admitted that no communication/correspondence was made with the plaintiff no. 1. He stated that he had been authorized by the members of the society to represent the plaintiff no. 1 as well. He admitted to not having proof of resignation of previous Secretary, Sh. Lallan Yadav. He further admitted that no elections have been held since 2015 till date and that no new members have either been added or resigned from the society during the period 2016 till date.
78. The document marked as Mark E is the resolution wherein Sh. Gopal Singh has been authorized to appear in the present legal proceedings. However, perusal of the same reflects that it is Sh. Gopal Singh himself who is authorizing himself to appear in the present matter without any counter signatures of the other members of the committee/Governing body. This opens up questions regarding the validity of the members committee as well as the authorization issued by him to himself which have remained unanswered. The resolution was passed in the year 2017, wherein admittedly no elections were held by the plaintiff no. 1 group after the year 2015.
79. The plaintiffs have failed to produce sufficient evidence to show case the effective elections being conducted and members inducted as per the bye-laws/rule and regulations of the plaintiff no.
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN
Page No.49 of 54 CHANDRA
VARUN
Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:13:30
+0530
2 society for the stated year as the last elections as per documents relied upon were allegedly held in the year 2011 post which plaintiff no. 1 left the territory of India. The general power of attorney in favour of Sh. Sayed Mushtaque was made in the year 2011 when plaintiff no. 1 was allegedly the president; however, present suit was first taken up by this court vide order dated 16.07.2014; and given the fact that plaintiff no. 1 had already left the territory of India in the year 2011-12, it can be adduced that the GPA stopped having its validity after the period of two years from said alleged election. Further, the present suit being preferred in the name of plaintiff no. 2 society was made through Sh. Lallan Yadav alleged to be the secretary of the plaintiff no.2 society. However, no evidence was brought to show that Sh. Lallan Yadav was the elected secretary for the stated period in which the present suit was preferred. Further, the resolution vide which Sh. Lallan Yadav was authorized qua present suit has been signed by Sh. Lallan Yadav himself without any counter signatures of the other members of the executive committee/governing body. Lastly, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India titled "Man Kaur (Dead) by Lrs v. Hartar Singh Sangha" MANU/SC/0789/2010 relied upon by the defendants is accurate, so much so that, the plaintiff no. 1 never stepped once in the witness box; and has claimed present suit in the year 2014 in the capacity as a president, vide admittedly he left the territory of India at/after 2011.
80. Emphasis has to be given to Section 15 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, which reads as:
Digitally Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 signed by Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies VARUN Page No.50 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:13:36 +0530 "15. Member defined -For the purposes of this Act a member of a society shall be a person who, having been admitted therein according to the rules and regulations, thereof, shall have paid a subscription, or shall have signed the roll or list of members thereof, and shall not have resigned in accordance with such rules and regulations.
Disqualified members -
But in all proceedings under this Act no person shall be entitled to vote or be counted as a member whose subscription at the time shall have been arrears for a period exceeding three months."
81. The order dated 17.06.2014 of the Ld. Registrar was issued for the period of financial year 2013-14 and given it is admitted by the GPA holder of the plaintiff no. 1 itself that the plaintiff no. 1 had left the territory of India in the given year 2011, it can be stated that doubts qua effective elections conducted remained answered. Further, no accounts book were furnished before this court to prove that due subscription was paid and accepeted and received on behalf of all the members by the plaintiff no. 1 group. Thereby, the claim of the defendant is accurate that in absence of the plaintiffs pleading and proving that there was a valid election held, in which the persons who were the members of the society had participated and were duly elected and that the election was conducted in an annual general meeting of the general body with requisite quorum, it cannot be said that the list of governing body filed by the plaintiff number 1 to control and manage the society is a valid legal list.
Digitally
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 signed by
VARUN
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies Page No.51 of 54 VARUN CHANDRA CHANDRA Date:
2025.08.26 17:13:42 +0530
82. Furthermore, the claim of the defendant that no specific pleadings have been led by the plaintiff no. 1 along with his reliance upon the judgment of " Bachhaj Nahar v. Nilima Mandal & Ors.," AIR 2009 SC 1103 is accurate. That is to say that the court cannot make out case which has not been pleaded. All reliefs sought by the plaintiff are flowing from the notion that the impugned order dated 17.06.2014 by the Ld. Registrar was illegal and that is why the plaintiff no.1 group had the validity and legality to manage the affairs of the plaintiff no. 2 society.
83. The Rules and Regulations of the plaintiff no. 2 society mentions that the elections are to be held after a period of two years and the claim of the plaintiff no. 1 to declare his group as valid managing committee is redundant and academic in nature, as the same is lost to time. Lastly, it had been admitted by plaintiff no. 1 group themselves that late fees as imposed by the then Ld. Commissioner was not paid and no such proof for completion of all documentation has been placed on record before this court.
84. In view of the same, the court is of the opinion that the plaintiffs have failed on the scale of preponderance and possibilities that the managing committee of the plaintiff no. 1 group is valid and legal and thereby, the declaration sought is hereby denied.
85. The legal dispute between the validity of the Governing bodies of the rivaling groups remained unanswered qua the election held for the period FY 2013-14 as the same has not been pleaded. The plaintiffs have sought reliefs by way of injunction which the Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 Digitally signed Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies by VARUN Page No.52 of 54 CHANDRA VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:13:47
+0530
court has duly decided upon the facts presented before it. The present suit is of the year 2016 and parties had sufficient time to contemplate on pleadings and statements to be made before this court. The matter shall, therefore, be decided on the basis of material presented before it.
86. In view of the aforesaid findings, the issue no. 1 is decreed against the plaintiff(s).
ISSUE NO.2 and 3 are consequential to issue no. 1 and shall be decided together.
ISSUE NO. 2: Whether the plaintiff is entitled for decree of permanent injunction as prayed for? OPP ISSUE NO. 3: Whether the plaintiff is entitled for decree of mandatory injunction as prayed for? OPP
87. In respect of the aforementioned issues, it has to be seen by this court whether the plaintiff(s) were able to prove that the managing committee of the plaintiff no. 1 group was legal and valid as the consequential relief of restraining the defendant no. 2 to 10 from creating hindrance in control and management of plaintiff no. 2 society and directions qua certifying the list of Governing body filed by the plaintiff no. 1 has been sought.
88. As the issue no. 1 has been decided against the plaintiff(s), the consequential relief sought qua the relief (c) and (d) vide issue no. 2 and 3 cannot be allowed in favour of the plaintiff.
Digitally signedCivil Suit No.267/14 9250/16 by VARUN
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies CHANDRA
Page No.53 of 54
VARUN Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:13:53
+0530
89. In view of the aforesaid findings, the issue no. 2 and 3 is hereby decreed against the plaintiff and in favour of the defendant.
RELIEF
90. As a net result of the aforesaid findings, the case of the plaintiff filed against the defendants for seeking reliefs of declaration, permanent and mandatory injunction is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost.
91. After preparation of the decree sheet by the Reader, the file shall be consigned to the record room.
Note : This judgment contains 54 pages and all the pages have been checked and signed by me.
Pronounced in open court (Varun Chandra)
today on 25.08.2025 CJ-02/Shahdara District
Karkardooma Courts/Delhi
Digitally signed
by VARUN
CHANDRA
VARUN
Date:
CHANDRA 2025.08.26
17:13:57
+0530
Civil Suit No.267/14 9250/16
Kim Chong Chul Vs. Registrar of Societies Page No.54 of 54