Madras High Court
B.Thiruchandiran vs Pondicherry Football ... on 14 October, 2022
CRP No.538 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated 14.10.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
Civil Revision Petition No.538 of 2019
and CMP No.3563 of 2019
1.B.Thiruchandiran
2.R.Ilangovan
3.P.Kumar
4.M.Julien
5.S.Kandasamy .. Petitioners/Defendants/Petitioners
Vs
1.Pondicherry Football Association
(Reg No.41/66 Esd' 1962)
Rep. by Honorary Secretary
S.Dhanasegar
2.N.Nestore .. Respondents/Plaintiffs/Respondents
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed to set aside the order dated
02.08.2018, passed in I.A.No.721 of 2015 in O.S.No.452 of 2015, on the
file of First Additional District Munsif Court, Pondicherry, by allowing
the Revision Petition.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No.538 of 2019
For Petitioners .. Mr.T.S.Baskaran
For Respondents .. Mr.D.Ravichandran
ORDER
The Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated
02.08.2018 passed in I.A.No.721 of 2015 in O.S.No.452 of 2015 on the
file of the I Additional District Munsif Court, Puducherry.
2. The petitioners are the defendants and the respondents in the
suit.
3. The case of the plaintiffs before the trial Court is as follows:
The plaintiffs are the Pondicherry Football Association registered
under the Societies Registration Act. In order to convene a general body
meeting, for declaration and for other reliefs, the plaintiffs approached
the trial Court by filing O.S.No.452 of 2015. Pending suit, the plaintiffs
filed I.A.No.144/2015 seeking for an interim injunction restraining the
defendants from conducting any special general body meeting on
01.03.2015. On hearing the defendants, interim injunction came to be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No.538 of 2019
passed, which was subsequently vacated by order dated 28.04.2015,
against which, an appeal came to be filed in CMA No.4/2015 before the
Additional Subordinate Judge, Puducherry. By judgment dated
26.03.2018, CMA No.4/2015 came to be dismissed, thereby confirming
the order vacating the interim injunction. Since the petition to convene a
general body meeting was dismissed, the defendants convened a meeting,
wherein, it was resolved to conduct an election as per the procedure
contemplated. As per the decision taken in the said meeting, the names
of the President and Treasurer, viz., the name of the plaintiffs were
removed. However, without challenging such removal, the plaintiffs
filed I.A.No.472/2015 seeking for a relief of restraining the defendants
from conducting the general body meeting and election, which was
scheduled on 28.06.2015. When there was no challenge to the removal of
their names as President and Treasurer and the conduct of general body
meeting, the suit has become infructuous. In the said I.A.No.472/2015,
an order of interim injunction was granted, which came to be suspended
by the order of this Court dated 26.06.2015 in CRP No.2526 of 2015 with
a direction to the defendants not to publish the results until further orders
from this Court. As such, elections were conducted on 28.06.2015 and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No.538 of 2019
pursuant to the order of this Court, the results were withheld. Therefore,
the defendants filed I.A.No.473/2018 to restrain the plaintiffs from
convening a general body meeting on 24.06.2018 or any other dates.
While that being so, the defendants filed I.A.No.721/2018 seeking to
dispose the suit having become infructuous. A counter came to be filed
by the plaintiffs resisting the said application stating that the reliefs that
have been passed in the suit was still persist.
4. A common order came to be passed in the said
I.A.Nos.472/2015, 473/2018 and 721/2018, whereby, the parties to the
dispute are directed to approach the All India Football Federation for
their appropriate reliefs. Challenging the said dismissal order, the
present Civil Revision Petition came to be filed by the defendants.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/defendants and the
learned counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants submitted that
when the interlocutory applications were dismissed on the ground that the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No.538 of 2019
civil Court has no jurisdiction, it ought to have dismissed the suit as
barred under law. Without doing so, the trial Court has erred in coming
to the conclusion that the parties to the dispute have to approach the All
India Football Federation, without the suit being dismissed. It is further
submitted that when the memorandum of association of the Pondicherry
Football Association and as per the bye-laws of the All India Football
Federation, the dispute among the members can be resolved by other
forum and not invoking the civil Court jurisdiction, the common order
passed by the trial Court is liable to be set aside by holding that the suit
itself is not maintainable, as per the memorandum of association and the
byelaws.
7. However, the said contentions are refuted by the
respondents/plaintiffs stating that in view of the bar contained under
Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, referring the parties to
the arbitration cannot be sustained. It is further submitted that after
several round of litigations before various fora, the defendants cannot
now turn around and raise the contention to refer the parties before the
arbitration have to be rejected. Moreover, the above Interlocutory
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No.538 of 2019
application was filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure
to dismiss the suit, after much water has flowed under the bridge.
However, the said petition is neither filed under Section 8 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act nor filed to dismiss the suit on the
ground of suit being covered by arbitration clause and hence, prayed to
dismiss the petition.
8. The dispute between the plaintiffs and the defendants has a
checkered history. In the case on hand, the plaintiff association is
affiliated to the All India Football Federation and hence,the constitution
of All India Football Federation is applicable to the plaintiff association.
Under Article 47 of the said Constitution, 6 types of judicial bodies are
framed, namely, disciplinary commiteee, appeal committee, ethics
committee, player status committee, club licensing appeals body
committee appointed by regulate competitions. Further Part VIII of the
said constitution Articles 54, 55 and 56 of the above constitution reads as
follows:
Article 54 :
The All India Football Federation recognizes the jurisdiction of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No.538 of 2019
Court of Arbitration for Sports (CAS) and the international Council of
Arbitration for Sports (ICAS) with headquarters to Lausanne
(Switzerland) to resolve the disputes between AIFF, members, affiliated
Units, Competitions, clubs, Players, Officials, intermediaries and licensed
match agents.
Article 55:
Appeals against final decisions passed by AIFF's judicial bodies
shall be lodged with CAS within 21 days of modification of the decision
in question.
2.Recourse may only be made to CAS after all previous stages of
appeal available to the level of AIFF, member, affiliated Unit and club
have been exhausted.
...
Article 56 (1) :
The members association and their affiliated units, clubs, leagues,
and all other natural or legal persons affiliated to them, agree to
recognize the jurisdiction of CAS;
(2) Recourse to ordinary courts of law is prohibited unless
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No.538 of 2019
specifically provided for in the AIFF regulations. Recourse to ordinary
courts of law for all types of provisional measures is also prohibited.
(3) the member association shall insert a clause in their statutes or
regulations, stipulating that it is prohibited to take disputes in the
association or disputes affecting leagues, members of leagues, clubs,
members of clubs, players and officials to ordinary courts of law, unless
the statutes or binding legal provisions specifically provide for or
stipulate recourse to ordinary courts of law. Instead of recourse to
ordinary courts of law, such disputes shall be referred to the relevant
judicial body of AIFF.
(4) In case, AIFF is made party to any dispute, the jurisdiction will
be of the competent courts in Delhi.
9. In view of the above, when the Articles 54 to 56 of the said
Constitution stipulate for approaching the All India Football Federation,
this Court has no hesitation in holding that the findings rendered by the
trial Court needs no interference at the hands of this Court. Considering
the submissions made on either side, this Court is of the opinion that if
the suit itself is directed to be disposed of by the trial Court, the interest
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No.538 of 2019
of justice would be served.
10. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed with a
direction to the trial Court to dispose of the suit within a period of four
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
14.10.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
RR
To
1.First Additional District Munsif Court,
Pondicherry
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No.538 of 2019
J.NISHA BANU, J.
RR
Civil Revision Petition No.538 of 2019
and CMP No.3563 of 2019
14.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
