Kalpothu Muthalipatti Nadar v. Kalpothu Muthalipatti Nadar
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.09.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR W.A(MD) No.363 of 2013 and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2013 Kalpothu Muthalipatti Nadar Uravinmurai, (Registration No.107 of 2010) D.No.2/190, Kalpothu Muthalipatti, Sivakasi (Via) Virudhunagar Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
... Appellant/3rd Respondent -vs1.Kalpothu Muthalipatti Nadar Uravinmurai, (Registration No.26 of 2010) Represented by its Secretary, D.No.165, P.C.Complex, Chithirakara Street, Madurai-625 001.
...1st Respondent /Writ Petitioner 2.The Registrar of Societies, Madurai South, Madurai. ...2nd Respondent /1st Respondent 3.The Registrar of Societies, Virudhunagar.
...3rd Respondent /2nd Respondent PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patents Act, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD) No.13164 of 2012, dated 03.01.2013, on the file of this Court.
Prayer in WP(MD). 13164/ 2012 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Declaration , declaring that the registration of the third respondent society under the name, "Kalpothu Muthalipatti Nadar Uravinmurai" by the second respondent as illegal, void and violative of Section 9 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975.
For Appellant :
Mr.R.Murali For R1 :
Mr.J.Barathan For R2 and R3 :
Mr.M.Murugan Government Advocate
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.] The writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge, after noting the similarity in the names of the appellant and the first respondent was pleased to allow the writ petition as prayed for.
2. On facts, it is clear that both the appellant and the first respondent are running the Society under the same name. It is not in dispute that the registration of the first respondent/writ petitioner is prior in point of time.
3. In such view of the matter, on construction of Section 9 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, the learned single Judge rightly allowed the writ petition as prayed for. Thus, we do not find any merit in this Writ Appeal.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that Section 11 provides for change the name of registration society. Therefore, appropriate direction may be given to the Registrar of Societies, Virudhunager.
5. Considering the said submission, liberty is given to the appellant to make an application seeking to exercise Section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, by the Registrar of Societies, Virudhunager. As and when such application is filed, the said authority shall pass appropriate orders on merits, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. With the above observation, this writ appeal is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar
To 1.The Registrar of Societies, Madurai South, Madurai.
2.The Registrar of Societies, Virudhunagar.
+One cc to Mr.T.R.Jeyapalam, Advocate, SR.No.77568 +One cc to Mr.M.Suresh Kumar, Advocate, SR.No.77755 +One cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR.No.78340 cp/akv RL/6C/3P/MR/KKR/SAR1/20/9/2017 W.A.(MD)No.363 of 2013 08.09.2017