Vijay Mehta v. Association of Apartment Owners of New Delhi House

6 Any other order which the Hon'ble Court may deemfit andproper in the C.R.P.2712015 Page 2 of[5] facts and circumstances of the present, case be also passed in favour of the plaintiff " Certain orders were passed by the Trial Court. The matter went before the Appellate Court. The Appellate Court by the impugned order had held that the Society i.e. 'NDHFOA' is a Society in existence; it is not non-existent. This part of the order is not the subject matter of challenge by the petitioner as it was always his, case that 'NDHFOA' could not have been held to be non-existent. There is no counter appeal. The order of the Appellate Court thus holding that 'NDHFOA' is a Society which exits as on date is an admitted position. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the impugned order had been passed in August, 2014. Matter is lying pending and subjudice before the Trial Court; there has been a stay by this Court and as such no proceeding can be carried out before the Trial Court. There were 190 members in the Society and there being no effective management -of the Society, their grievances cannot be addressed. Attention has been drawn to certain letters which have been placed before this Court wherein two of the incumbent flat owners, (resident of Flat No. 402 and Flat No. 114) had written to the concerned SHO making a complaint regarding stoppage of the essential services i.e. water supply in their premises; submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner being that in the absence of an effective elected body of the Society, these day to day affairs cannot be carried out and the members of the Society are aggrieved. These submissions have been refuted. Learned counsel for the C.R.P. 2712015 respondent points out that the impugned order calls for no interference; she however has no objection if a time bound schedule is laid down by the Trial Court to complete the trial but the oral prayer now made before this Court by the petitioner (which. is to the effect that an Observer be appointed to conduct the elections of the Society) may not be permitted as if this is pennitted, the entire suit pending before the Trial Court would become infructuous. Written submissions have also been filed by the learned counsel for the respondent. I Parties have been heard. The averments contained in the plaint in the suit (71/2013) pending before the Trial Court have been perused. This appears to be a war between two associations i.e. theNDHFOA: and the'AAONDHA:. The impugned order has held thatNDHFOA` is a Society which is in existence. The averments contained in the suit pending before the Trial Court have also been perused. They are largely premised on the averment thatNDHFON has been dissolved and such a dissolved Society cannot hold election and accordingly they be restrained from issuing letters/circulations i.e. for the purpose of an election. I%* IN Since this order holdingNDEFON as non-existent has been set aside and the Appellate Court has confin-ned that 'NDHFON is body which is in existence and is alive, the premise on which the suit of the plaintiff (pending before the Trial Court) is based is largely demolished. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the members of the Society (Association of Apartment Owners of New Delhi House, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi) are aggrieved and their CR.P. 2712015 grievances on several scores cannot be addressed in the absence of an elected body is also an admitted position. This cannot be disp~ted and has in fact not been disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent. That being the position, this Court has no hesitation in holding that a transparent election' be permitted of this flat owners Association i.e. New Delhi Building Housing Association located at 27, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi which will be conducted under the aegis of-an Observer i.e. a retired High Court Judge namely Justice P.K. Bhasin (Mobile No. 9871300032 ) The process of election will be initiated by the learned Observer within a period of one week from the receipt of this order and he shall ensure that the elections of the Executive Body of the Association are carried out transparently and freely. The fee of the learned Observer is fixed at Rs.1.[5] lac. It shall be paid by the petit ioner. The Observer shall submit its report before the Trial Court. The impugned order is modified to the said effect. Petition disposed of. Order dasti under the signatures o INDERMEET KAUR[9] J FEBRUARY 25, 2016 A