01Facts
The Malnad Technical Education Society (R) is a registered society governed by the Karnataka Societies Registration (KSR) Act, 1960.
Following an election in January 2025, respondents 1-3 held the offices of Chairman, Secretary, and Treasurer.
In September 2025, a no-confidence motion was moved by the petitioners (defendants 1-13) against these office bearers.
Prior to the meeting, the Chairman unilaterally suspended three members (defendants 11-13) to prevent them from voting
¶ 11In the subsequent meeting, 13 out of 24 members voted for removal
¶ 16Respondents 1-3 filed O.S. No. 762/2025 seeking a declaration of their status and an injunction against interference.
The Trial Court and first Appellate Court granted an injunction in favor of the respondents, holding that the no-confidence motion failed for lack of a 2/3rd majority
¶ 3.1-3.2The petitioners challenged these orders via Writ Petitions.
02Issues
i.1. Whether a suit filed by a Society represented by its Chairman/Secretary is maintainable under Section 15 of the KSR Act without a specific governing body resolution or authorization in the bylaws.
¶ 9(i)ii.2. Whether an office bearer of a society can be unilaterally suspended by the Chairman without a resolution by the Executive Committee and in violation of natural justice.
¶ 11iii.3. Whether a no-confidence motion against office bearers requires a 2/3rd majority or a simple majority when the Act and bylaws are silent.
¶ 2003Law Applied
Section 15 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, which mandates that a society must sue through a person determined by its rules or appointed by a specific resolution
¶ 9(i)the power to institute suits vests in the Board/Executive Committee, not individual office bearers [B.H. Inamdar v. B.F. Swamy, ILR 1991 KAR 1654]
¶ 9(iii)in the absence of specific statutory provisions, office bearers elected by simple majority can be removed by simple majority to uphold democratic principles [Vipulbhai M. Chaudhary v. Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd., (2015) 8 SCC 1]
¶ 21Provisions in the judgment · 5 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Section 39Section 14Section 7Section 151
Societies Registration Act, 1860 Section 6
04Reasoning
The Court found that the suit was prima facie not maintainable because the Society’s bylaws (specifically Bylaw 6 and 7) vested the power to institute legal proceedings solely in the Executive Committee, and no resolution was passed authorizing the Chairman or Secretary to sue
¶ 9(ii)the Chairman unilaterally suspended defendants 11-13 on vague grounds without an inquiry or committee resolution, rendering the suspension void ab initio
¶ 11-12Since the office bearers were originally elected by a simple majority, the Court applied the "same procedure" doctrine from Vipulbhai Chaudhary, concluding that the 13 (and later 14) votes out of 24 constituted a valid simple majority
¶ 25Consequently, the balance of convenience shifted to the petitioners, as the office bearers had lost democratic confidence
¶ 28-2905Holding
The High Court allowed the Writ Petitions and set aside the orders of the Trial Court and Appellate Court
¶ 30It held that the suit was prima facie non-maintainable
¶ 29(i)the suspension of members was illegal
¶ 29(ii)The Court declared the no-confidence motion successful by simple majority
¶ 29(iii)ruled that the newly elected office bearers (defendants 1, 2, and 12) are entitled to manage the Society’s affairs pending the final disposal of the suit
¶ 29(iv)I.A. No. 3 (filed by respondents) was dismissed, and I.A. No. 4 (filed by petitioners) was allowed
¶ 30Original Court PDF
SRI G T KUMARvsMALNAD TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
