One member authorized to disseminate COVID-19 SOPs
Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, June 19: High Court has upheld the Trial Court order whereby several decisions taken in the Special General Meeting of the Jammu Chamber of Commerce and Industry held on December 19, 2018 were kept in abeyance. Extension in term of office bearers of the Chamber and amendments in its constitution were among the decisions which have raised the eye-brows and resulted into the litigation.
The decisions taken in the Special General Meeting held on December 19, 2018 were challenged by Y V Sharma, Principal Member of Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the 2nd Additional District Judge Jammu vide order dated March 16, 2020 temporarily restrained the defendants from acting as office bearers and kept the impugned decisions in abeyance.
In the Special General Meeting, the term of office bearers of the Chamber was extended and various amendments were made in the Constitution although their term had expired in March 2019 and they were under Constitutional obligation to announce and conduct fresh elections by April 2019.
The order of 2nd Additional District Judge was challenged before the High Court by the Chamber of Commerce and Industry and Others and Senior Advocate K S Johal along with Advocate Karman Singh Johal appearing for the appellants submitted that the respondents had no locus standi to file the suit and without following the mandate of Societies Registration Act, the suit was incompetent and as such no interim injunction could have been granted.
Moreover, it was further submitted that the respondents had not approached the court with clean hands as they had suppressed the factum of constitution of the Executive Committee as well as the Presidium by the appellant after his election, from the Trial Court. “The provisions of the constitution have been substantially complied by the appellants as such there was no violation and the failure on the part of the Trial Court to appreciate this aspect of the matter renders the judgment unsustainable”, counsel for the appellants further submitted.
After hearing Senior Advocate K S Johal for the appellants and Advocates Bhanu Singh Slathia, Rahul Bharti and Sachin Gupta for the respondents, Justice Ranjesh Oswal observed, “the findings recorded by the Trial Court appear as reasonable conclusions on the basis of relevant material available before it”, adding “the order impugned suffers from no legal infirmity as the Trial Court has passed the same well within the domains of law”.
“However, in present times due to COVID-19 pandemic, it is imperative that the CCI Jammu is able to disseminate the information provided by the Government authorities for ensuring the compliance of safety norms for business establishments and also the other information that may be necessary for the welfare of the members of the CCI Jammu so it would be in the interest of CCI Jammu as well as its members that someone is authorised to do so”, the High Court said.
“As the Respondent No 5 (Manish Gupta) has been authorized by the Trial Court to operate the bank account so he is further authorized to inform the members of CCI Jammu about the Government instructions/policies issued from time to time and while doing so he would not represent himself as Secretary General of CCI Jammu”, the High Court said, adding “Trial Court shall be at liberty to modify/alter this part of the order without any reference to this court on the motion of either of the parties”.
High Court further said, “any observation made is solely for the purpose of disposal of present appeal and shall have no bearing upon the final disposal of the suit”, adding “the order impugned is modified only to this extent without disturbing the directions contained in the same”.
Accordingly, High Court disposed of the appeal along with connected applications.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
