### Head: Maintainability of Representative Suit by Society Office Bearers and Validity of Simplified Majority in No-Confidence Motions Summary: The High Court of Karnataka set aside interim injunctions granted in favor of the erstwhile office bearers of a registered society. The Court held that a suit filed by a society without a specific executive committee resolution as mandated by Section 15 of the Karnataka Societies Registration Act is prima facie non-maintainable. Furthermore, it ruled that in the absence of specific byelaws, office bearers may be removed via a no-confidence motion using the same simple majority procedure by which they were elected. The Court also invalidated unilateral suspension orders issued against committee members without following principles of natural justice and prescribed byelaw procedures.

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

In the subsequent meeting, 13 out of 24 members voted for removal

Respondents 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

The petitioners challenged these orders via Writ Petitions.

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.

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.

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.

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

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]

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]

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

the Chairman unilaterally suspended defendants 11-13 on vague grounds without an inquiry or committee resolution, rendering the suspension void ab initio

Since 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

Consequently, the balance of convenience shifted to the petitioners, as the office bearers had lost democratic confidence

It held that the suit was prima facie non-maintainable

the suspension of members was illegal

The Court declared the no-confidence motion successful by simple majority

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

I.A. No. 3 (filed by respondents) was dismissed, and I.A. No. 4 (filed by petitioners) was allowed