I am a member in a CHS in Mumbai where elections are to be held under the supervision of Mr Pramod P Padaye, Presiding Officer nominated for this purpose in a SGBM convened on 25.10.2015 @ 10 am in our colony premises.
Around 54 members out of 138 members have filed a case against our society alleging certain untenable and false statements in Co-op Court No.4 where after a prolonged arguments a few members have been admitted as interveners in the dispute who have already submitted their evidences to prove the false claims of the 54 disputants. Our present MC has surreptiously signed an out of court settlement with the disputants though they had sufficient merits to defend their case.
Our present MC did not think it proper to convene a Special General Body to apprise the members about the case filed by 54 members against the society and seek their directions to deal with the case. Instead they went ahead and appointed legal counsel to fight the case by sending a simple circular to all members indicating that MC will defend the case approrpriately whereas they acted against the interests of all members by agreeing to settle the case outside the court. However, due to intervention of some concerned members, the MOU signed between disputants and representative of Housing Society could not get official sanction of the court and the Hon’ble Court admitted these members as intervenors on getting to know that everything was not above board in the case under review, as was being projected by both the lawyers. After a prolonged period now that the society has raised objections to Co-op. Court(jurisdiction) hearing this case which in actual terms pertains to redevelopment of society’s. buildings.
Under the present circumstances, in case any of the disputants members gets nominated and elected to the MC of our society, it may dilute the case pending before the co-op. court. They may try to scuttle the case, which they are bound to loose any way and pay heavy penalty to filing a frivilous case against the society, pay the litigation costs to society as well as to the intervenors, etc. In the process, members have had to bear the legal expenses of society which was avoidable. These disputants, instead of presenting and arguing their case in AGM which they could not succeed earlier, had resorted to approaching the court which needs to be condemned by all.
Kindly advise the proper line of action that we need to adopt to ensure that the objectives and interests of co-operative society is not jeopardised.
I C Naik
Once the matter is before the Court TRUTH must win finally. Courts test PATIENCE and there is no option.
Who is Mr Pramod P Padaye, If he is nominated by the committee then Election will be void. If he is from Dy Registrar’s office you must go by a democratic outcome.