The petitioners are the members of the respondent No.3 - Cooperative Housing Society. The Society passed a resolution permitting commercial construction/use of the property of the society. Some of the petitioners therefore preferred Lavad Suit No.1154 of 2005 before the Board of Nominees, and the same is pending before the Board of Nominees, Co-operative Societies. The issue is with respect to the use of certain properties and premises in co-operative society. The members who are plaintiffs before the Board of Nominees objected to the premises being put to commercial use/activities. The matter of injunction came to be considered before this Court at interim stage and Lavad Suits was pending. At that stage, the learned Single Judge passed the impugned order and allowed the petitions and the orders passed by the Tribunal were quashed and set aside and the interim order passed by the Board of Nominees on 22nd June 2006 was restored and ordered to continue till disposal of the suit.
2 Previously, this Court had on 24th December 2009 provided that no members of the co-operative society can start fresh commercial activities in their respective flat, bungalow, plot but the said interim order will not affect those who were already involved in the commercial activities since prior to the said date. However, it was further provided that in the mean time those premises which are used for commercial activities since prior to 22nd June 2006 will not be disturbed but they will not alter or renovate their respective premises without prior permission of the Court. It was agreed that till the suit is disposed of, those persons who have been carrying on the commercial activities in the premises since prior to 22nd June 2006 may not be disturbed.
3 In partial modification of the order dated 24th December 2009, the Division Bench of this Court directed that the persons carrying on the commercial use of the properties prior to 22nd June 2006 may carry on such renovation of the properties without disturbing the basic structure of the property in question. It was also clarified by the division Bench that in view of order dated 22nd June 2006, construction may be completed, but the property shall not be put to any commercial use till final disposal of the suit. It was further clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion as regards the merits and demerits of the pending disputes between the parties before the Board of Nominees and the pending suit shall be decided in accordance with law unmindful of any observations by this Court in this order or in the orders under challenge in these appeals passed by the learned Single Judge. Learned Judge of the Lavad Court was directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible.
4 The petitioners contended that in spite of operation of the injunction granted by this Honourable Court the Society passed a Resolution dated 21st September 2010 amending the byelaws permitting the commercial use of the plots of the Society and the said amendment is pending approval before the District Registrar, Cooperative Societies. The petitioners have, therefore, filed a separate Lavad Suit No.707 of 2010 seeking a declaration and injunction challenging the legality and validity of the resolution and also seeking injunction against the society from executing the resolution dated 21st September 2010.
5 Prima facie, the matter requires consideration, but admission of the petition will not serve the ends of justice and it will not be in the interests of both the sides. Therefore, with the consent of both the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal by issuing the following directions:-
The Board of Nominees, Ahmedabad is directed to hear and decide both Lavad Suits viz. Lavad Suit No.707 of 2010 and Lavad Suit No.1154 of 2005 as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of one year from the date of this order. It is clarified that the observations made by the Tribunal are tentative in nature and the Board of Nominees will not be influenced by the observations made by the revisional authority.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, this petition stands disposed of.
(K.S.Jhaveri, J.) *mohd Top