Delhi High Court
Vijay Mehta vs Association Of Apartment Owners ... on 27 January, 2017
$~A-60
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 27th January, 2017
+ C.R.P. 27/2015 & CM No.31088/2016
VIJAY MEHTA ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Peeyoosh Kalra, Mr.Sudhindra
Tripathi & Ms.Sona Babbar,
Advocates
versus
ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS
OF NEW DELHI HOUSE ( REGD ) ..... Respondent
Through Ms.Sunita Bhardwaj, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
JAYANT NATH, J. (ORAL)
C.R.P. 27/2015
1. Present petition was filed seeking to impugn the judgment dated
19.8.2014 passed by the appellate court dismissing the appeal of the
petitioners to the extent of maintenance of status quo regarding non-
declaration of results of the governing body elections of New Delhi House
Flat Owners Association (Regd.) (hereinafter referred to as 'NDHFOA').
2. This court on 25.2.2016 disposed of the petition partly modifying the
impugned order. The court noted that the impugned order has set aside the
observations that NDHFOA is non-existent. It also noted the submission of
the learned counsel for the petitioner that members of the Society are
aggrieved and their grievance on several scores cannot be addressed in the
absence of an elected body. Hence, the court directed a transparent election
for the flat owners association, namely, NDFHOA and appointed Justice
P.K.Bhasin (Retd.) as an Observer with appropriate directions.
3. Against the said directions of this court dated 25.2.2016 the
Association of Apartment Owners of New Delhi HOuse filed an SLP before
the Supreme Court. On 1.4.2016 the SLP was withdrawn with liberty to file
a Review Petition before this court. The review petition was dismissed with
costs of Rs.25,000/- on 12.5.2016.
4. On 12.05.2016 the court noted that a letter/communication dated
22.3.2016 has been received from the Court Observer Justice P.K.Bhasin
(Retd.) seeking certain directions. The court clarified that the powers of the
learned observer in terms of the directions contained in the order dated
25.2.2016 are unfettered. He has been appointed to conduct the elections
freely and transparently without involvement of either of the two
associations, namely, NDHFOA and the Association of Apartment Owners
of New Delhi House. It was clarified that it will be the discretion of the
learned observer to appoint whomsoever he may think fit to assist him to
conduct the election process. It was also clarified that all disputes regarding
elections raised during the aforesaid process would be within the ambit of
learned observer to decide.
5. Now, the court has received a fresh communication from the learned
observer dated 20.7.2016. The learned observer has pointed out in the said
communication that pursuant to the orders of this court the learned observer
has undertaken the exercise of finalizing the electoral college/voters' list of
NDHFOA. It noted that the learned observer has again found only 29
persons eligible for inclusion in the final list and most of whom are persons
who over the years have been fighting for control over the affairs of
NDHFOA. The Court Observer, however, felt that though vast number of
persons may be waiting for an opportunity for casting their votes, only 29
members will be entitled to participate which may be a travesty of justice. It
is pointed out that there are large number of flat owners who might be
eligible to be enrolled as members but were are not enrolled because of
disputes between the groups. Hence, the learned observer was of the view
that the elections should be held after enrolment of genuine aspirants by an
independent authority to be decided by the court. However, in case the court
holds that the learned observer should go ahead with the elections, the
learned observer noted he will do the same.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties on different occasions.
Learned counsel for the respondent has made vehement submissions and has
filed a detailed written submission which deals essentially on the merits of
the matter. She has emphasized that this court is exercising revisionary
powers which are extremely limited and the court cannot travel beyond the
said powers.
7. The issue is very limited. The petition already stands disposed of with
directions to the Court Observer to hold elections of NDHFOA. The learned
observer has only sought some clarifications from the court, namely, as to
whether he should go ahead and hold elections despite the fact that there are
only 29 eligible voters in the list.
8. The alternative suggestion made by the learned observer, namely, to
hold elections after enrolment of genuine aspirants by an independent
authority, in my opinion, cannot be ordered in the present petition. Such a
direction cannot be passed in the present revision petition which already
stands disposed of. The directions to hold elections were passed on the facts
and contentions relating to the impugned order which had passed directions
to continue to maintain status quo of non-declaration of results.
9. In view of the earlier orders passed by this court on 25.2.2016 in the
revision petition. The order passed by the Supreme Court in the SLP filed by
the respondent dated 1.4.2016 and, the order passed on 12.5.2016 in the
review petition filed by the respondent, it is not possible for this court to give
further directions as suggested by the learned Court Observer. The learned
Court Observer is requested to proceed and conduct the elections as per the
previous directions. It would be left open to the prospective members of the
NDHFOA to take steps as per law to get themselves enrolled as members of
the association so as to enable them to participate in the affairs of the
association.
10. Accordingly, the learned Court Observer is requested to spare his
valuable time and complete the exercise expeditiously, as per earlier
directions. The parties shall co-operate with the learned Court Observer in
completing the exercise.
11. The communication of the learned Court Observer dated 20.7.2016
may be filed by the Registry. A copy of this order be sent to the learned
Court Observer.
CM No.31088/2016
This application is filed under section 151 CPC for appropriate
directions to the Court Observer to hold elections of the NDHFOA and to
submit its report to the court. The application is signed by one Mr.Vikram
Mittal who states himself to be the Joint Secretary of the said Association.
The application seeks elections based on the final voter list finalized by the
learned Court Observer in his order dated 14.7.2016.
This application is also disposed of in terms of the above order.
(JAYANT NATH)
JUDGE
JANUARY 27, 2017
N
Corrected and signed on 31.5.2017
