Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

kvm ARBP638.13

4. Respondent no.1 society issued a letter of intent to the petitioner on 17 th September, 2010. Society resolved to execute a development agreement with the petitioner and authorised its chair person, Honorary Secretary and treasurer to sign the development agreement, power of attorney and all other documents required to be signed by the society for the re-development of the property. At the meeting of the managing committee held on 9th June, 2011 the draft of the development agreement, power of attorney and other related documents were discussed. It was decided to hold a special general body meeting to table the said documents and to take decision thereon. That development agreement, power of attorney were circulated amongst the members. At the special general body meeting held on 20 th May, 2012, such draft documents were tabled and discussed. It is the case of the petitioner and the society that after incorporating the suggestions of the members, drafts were approved and it was resolved to execute the said documents. Appropriate resolution was accordingly passed at the said meeting. In the annual general body meeting held on 14th August, 2012 of the society, development agreement togetherwith proposed plans were approved and accordingly development agreement came to be executed on 31 st August, 2012 between the petitioner and respondent no.1 society. All relevant resolutions passed by the society from time to time for redevelopment have been recited in details in the said development agreement. In the said agreement, details of the existing flats and shares occupied by the members of the 1st respondent society are enclosed at Ex.B. Petitioner paid a sum of Rs.50 lacs to the respondent no.1 society which payment was duly acknowledged by the society.

10. Mr.Wasoodev, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the resolution passed by respondent no.1 society, the said PMC had prepared a draft tender stating the requirements of the society for redevelopment. Tender submitted by the petitioner was accepted in the meeting held by 1 st respondent society. Draft development agreement, power of attorney and various other documents were approved after circulation of such documents to each of the members in the meeting held by the society. Each of such resolution has been approved by more than ¾ majority of the members. It is submitted that none of these resolutions or the execution of development agreement in favour of the petitioner by the society has been challenged by any of the members in any court of law. These resolutions are thus binding on all the members of the society including respondent nos. 2 to 6. It is submitted that some of the meetings were attended by some of the respondents. Pursuant to execution of such agreement in favour of the petitioner, petitioner has already paid Rs.50 lacs to the society as a lumpsum consideration.

kvm ARBP638.13 Society had appointed a Project Management Consultant for the purpose of preparing a report and draft tender. Tender document prepared by the said PMC appointed by the Society disclosed the area in possession of each member. Based on such tender document prepared by the society, various bidders including the petitioner submitted their bid. All these bids were opened by the society. It was resolved by the society to appoint the petitioner as developer. Draft development agreement and Power of Attorney was circulated to all the members including respondent Nos.2 to 6. There was some suggestion given by some of the member.

Perusal of the record indicates that some of the suggestions were also incorporated in draft development agreement.

ig Draft development agreement and other documents were thereafter approved by the members of the society in one of the Special General Body Meeting by more than ¾ majority. Some of the office bearers of the society were authorised to execute such agreement and the other documents with the petitioner developer. It is not in dispute that any of these resolutions which were passed by more than ¾ majority as well as development agreement entered into between the petitioner and society have been impugned by any of the members in any Court of law. These resolutions, in my view are thus binding on all the members of the society under the provisions of Societies Act and bye-laws of the society.