Madras High Court
Vagarayampalayam Anaithu vs The Inspector General Of Registration on 19 October, 2024
Author: D.Krishnakumar
Bench: D.Krishnakumar
W.A.No.3069 of 2024
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI
W.A.No.3069 of 2024
and
C.M.P.Nos.23166 of 2024
Vagarayampalayam Anaithu
Viyabarigal Nala Sangam Covai Mavattam,
Rep. by its President,
Having office at No.11/138, Thotta Salai Street,
Kittampalayam Road,
Vagarayampalayam 641 659,
Coimbatore District. ...Appellant
Vs.
1. The Inspector General of Registration,
Office of Registration Department,
No.11, Santhome High Road,
Chennai 600 028.
2. The Registrar (Administration)
District Registrar Office,
Coimbatore 641 018.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.3069 of 2024
3. Vaagai Siru Vyabarigal Sangam,
(Dissolved Sangam),
Rep. by its Authorised Signatory,
No.8216, Gandhi Kadai Veedhi,
Vagarayampalayam, Karumathampatti (Via),
Coimbatore 641 659. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, to set aside
the order dated 22.07.2024 made in W.P.No.25216 of 2022.
For Appellant : Mr. G.Murugendran
For Respondents : Mr.B.Vijay,
Additional Government Pleader,
for RR1 & 2
******
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.)
Vagarayampalayam Anaithu Viyabarigal Nala Sangam Covai
Mavattam, Rep. by its President, Having office at No.11/138, Thotta Salai
Street, Kittampalayam Road, Vagarayampalayam 641 659, Coimbatore
District has preferred the appeal before this Court against the order of the
writ Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. According to the appellant, he has filed the writ petition
challenging the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 20.01.2022, thereby
allowing the appeal filed by the 3rd respondent and ordered to revive the 3rd
respondent under Section 45(5)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration
Act.
3. According to the appellant, it is a registered society in Reg.No.64
of 1995. Due to improper functioning of the office bearers of the 3 rd
respondent, without conducing any election to the association and non
submission of returns/ reports to the Office of the Registrar of Societies, the
3rd respondent Association was dissolved by the proceedings dated
23.08.1998 on the file of the 1st respondent and the same was also published
in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette 49 as per Section 44(4) of the Tamil
Nadu Societies Registration Act. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent filed an
appeal before the Government as against the proceedings of the 1st
respondent dated 23.08.1998. The said appeal was dismissed by the order
dated 04.04.2014. The 3rd respondent suppressing the said fact that already
appeal was filed and the same was dismissed by the Government, once
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
again appeal was filed before the 1st respondent and the same was ordered to
revive the 3rd respondent association and also permitted to file annual
returns and statements for the period in which the 3rd respondent failed to
submit.
4. The appellant made a representation to appoint a liquidator to
manage the assets of the 3rd respondent and the same was not considered.
Against which an individual one A.Ramasamy had filed a writ petition in
W.P.No.7565 of 2015 for a direction to the respondents to appoint a
liquidator to manage the assets of the 3rd respondent. The said writ petition
filed in an individual capacity was disposed of and liberty was granted to
challenge the order passed by the Inspector General of Registration on
20.01.2022, whereby the 3rd respondent Sangam was revived.
5. Now the present writ petition is filed by Vagarayampalayam
Anaithu Viyabarigal Nala Sangam Covai Mavattam, Rep. by its President,
and not in an individual capacity, challenging the order passed by the 1st
respondent dated 20.01.2022 thereby allowing the appeal filed by the 3rd
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
respondent and ordered to revive the 3rd respondent under 45(5)(b) of the
Tamil Naud Societies Registration Act. Though the writ Court had
dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner has no locus
standi to maintain the writ petition, the appellant has filed the instant appeal
challenging the said order.
6. Though several grounds were raised in the writ appeal, the
primordial submission on the part of the respondents is that the writ Court
has passed an order that the appellant has no locus standi to challenge the
order passed by the 1st respondent dated 20.01.2022 in the capacity of
Sangam represented by its President and that the Sangam is not the member
of the 3rd respondent.
7. The learned counsel for the appellant has made an attempt to
convince this Court that one A.Ramasamy is the President of the Sangam
and he is also the member of the 3rd respondent Association and thereby, he
is aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the Inspector General of
Registration dated 20.01.2022.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. We have carefully examined the cause title of the writ petition filed
and the writ appeal filed by the appellant, wherein the appellant is shown as
Vagarayampalayam Anaithu Viyabarigal Nala Sangam Covai Mavattam
represented by its President and in the affidavit also appellant name is
stated as Vagarayampalayam Anaithu Viyabarigal Nala Sangam Covai
Mavattam represented by its President. Therefore, the aforesaid Sangam has
filed the present writ petition only as a Sangam represented by its President.
9. This Court has specifically raised a query that the said Sangam is
not a member of the 3rd respondent Association and therefore there is no
person aggrieved under Section 44(5)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Societies
Registration Act. According to the appellant the said Ramasamy is the
President of the Sangam. But, the writ petition is not filed in individual
capacity. Therefore, the writ petition filed by the Sangam challenging the
aforesaid order is not maintainable, as it is not the aggrieved person. Hence,
the writ Court has rightly dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the
petitioner has no locus standi to file the writ petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
10. We do not find any merit to entertain this writ appeal.
Accordingly this writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(D.K.K., J.) (P.B.B, J.)
dsa 19.10.2024
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
Speaking order / Non-Speaking order
To:-
1. The Inspector General of Registration,
Office of Registration Department,
No.11, Santhome High Road,
Chennai 600 028.
2. The Registrar (Administration)
District Registrar Office,
Coimbatore 641 018.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
and
P.B.BALAJI, J.
dsa
19.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
