Q1: What is the dispute about in the Tirthankar Darshan Co-operative Housing Society case?
SRELJ: The dispute centers on the society’s refusal to admit respondents 4 and 5 as members despite their purchase of Shop No. 4 and fulfillment of statutory requirements. The case examines whether the society’s refusal and delay in responding to the membership application were legally valid under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
Q2: When did respondents 4 and 5 acquire the shop and apply for membership?
SRELJ: Respondents 4 and 5 purchased Shop No. 4 under a registered instrument dated 24th July 2019. They subsequently submitted their membership application to the society along with the required fees.
Q3: What action did respondents 4 and 5 take when the society failed to respond?
SRELJ: Having received no communication from the society within the stipulated timeframe under Section 22(2) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, respondents 4 and 5 filed an appeal before the Deputy Registrar, who directed the society to admit them as members.
Q4: What were the society’s objections to admitting respondents 4 and 5?
SRELJ: The society argued that there was a delay in decision-making on the membership application, which entitled it to refuse admission. Additionally, the society insisted that respondents 4 and 5 had not paid a welfare fee, which it claimed was mandatory based on a 2017 resolution.
Q5: How did the Deputy Registrar and Divisional Joint Registrar rule on the matter?
SRELJ: Both authorities ruled in favor of respondents 4 and 5, stating that they had complied with all legal requirements, including payment of the permissible transfer fee. They directed the society to admit them as members.
Q6: What did the High Court decide in this case?
SRELJ: The High Court dismissed the society’s petition, upholding the orders of the Deputy Registrar and Divisional Joint Registrar. The Court confirmed that respondents 4 and 5 had paid the legal transfer fee of Rs. 25,000 and that the society’s demand for an additional welfare fee was unlawful.
Q7: Can a housing society charge welfare fees for membership transfer?
SRELJ: No, the Court clarified that a society cannot levy additional charges like welfare fees beyond what is legally permissible under the governing law and directives. Such charges are considered unlawful unless explicitly authorized.
Q8: What are the legal implications of this judgment for other cooperative societies?
SRELJ: The judgment reinforces that societies must strictly follow the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, and cannot impose unauthorized charges or delay membership decisions to frustrate applicants. It also reiterates the power of authorities to direct societies to admit eligible applicants.
Q9: What precedent does this case set for membership disputes?
SRELJ: This case serves as a precedent ensuring that prospective members’ rights are protected, societies adhere to statutory timelines, and only legally sanctioned fees are charged during membership transfers.
