9911796707
TMI Blog1916 (12) TMI 1X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to the validity of the election, which were all rejected as baseless by the City Civil Judge, who gave plaintiff the declaration sued for. Hence this appeal. 3. Before us, the validity of the election was attacked on three grounds. Two of these may be briefly disposed of. It was argued: (1) that the procedure was in contravention of Rule 6 of a series of rules framed for them selves by the committee and muttawallis in 1888 (Exhibit IV) and (2) that the election was Void for failure to give notice of meeting to one Moulvi Mahomed Madhi Sahib, who, according to appellants, was one of the muttawallis at the time. 4. As regards (1), a consideration of Exhibit IV leaves no doubt in my mind that Rule 6, which is relied on, was only intended to govern the proceedings at meetings of the managing committee, and has no application to elections by the committee and muttawallis conjointly. I may add that I find no evidence that this procedure was ever followed at elections. In my opinion, the objection based on this rule is without foundation. 5. As regards (2), Moulvi Mahomed Madhi Sahib was at the time of his appointment as muttawalli in 1906 a boy of eleven years of age; an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the judgment of Subramania Aiyar, J., in Anantanarayana Ayyar v. Kuttalam Pillai (1) to support such a view, though he points out that the rule is one rather of English Law than of general jurisprudence. The learned Judge, on the other hand, applied the rule to the case before him, examined the constitution of the body in question, its particular rules of procedure and decided that there was in that case a valid rule whereby the quorum at a meeting was fixed at a number less than the number present at the meeting out of which the dispute arose. On this ground he declared the resolution valid. 11. In the English case quoted, Lysters case, In ret Tavistock Iron Works Company (2), which is also quoted in Anantanarayana Ayyar v. Kuttalam Pillai (1), Lord Romilly, M.R., sought and found a ground of exemption from the usual rule in the existence of a quorum- not by specific rule-but by the course of business adopted by the particular body in (1) 22 M.481:9 M.L.J. 203; 8 Ind. Dec (N. S.) 345. (2) (1867) 4 Eq. 233 36 L.J. Ch. 616; 16 L.T. 824-15 W. R. 1007. that case. I may remark that in that case there was a specific rule to the effect that every question at a Board or a Committee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wered the committee to fix its own quorum. In In re Tavistock Iron Works Company (1867) L.R. 4 Eq. 233 this position was made clear. The argument of counsel and the authorities quoted in that case show that unless empowered to fix a quorum the committee could not agree to substitute the decision of a fixed number among them for that of the whole committee. 17. A distinction is drawn between a committee consisting of a definite number and a body composed of an indefinite number of persons. The distinction seems to be this : In the first class of cases, the number of the select body is fixed. In the second class of cases, the number is subject to variation every year or at stated periods. For example, the number of electors of a Temple Committee or of a member for a Municipality is liable to fluctuation. Residence for a particular period, or the attaining of age of minors can bring in new electors. Whereas in the case of a Select Committee, the number is fixed. The procedure to be adopted at the meetings of these two different bodies is stated in Halsbury's Laws of England, Volume 8, pages 351 and 352. It seems well settled that an election by a definite body can only be held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he actual decision in that case does not support the position, taken up by the respondent. 20. It was suggested that the usage of the institution was in favour of electing a member of the committee in the way it was done on the present occasion. In the first place, the scheme is of so recent an origin that there has been no time for the development of custom in this behalf, In the 2nd place it is doubtful whether a custom can be pleaded with reference to a decree of court. The proper course would have been to apply for its variation. Lastly, I am satisfied that the evidence to which our attention was drawn does not establish the alleged custom. Exhibit III only relates to circulation. It is the same with Exhibit III (a). Exhibit XV has no reference to election at all. The mixed process of passing a resolution at a meeting and then having it circulated among the absent members seems to have been gone througing this instance. These documents afford no proof of the custom now set up. 21. For the above reasons, I agree in holding that the plaintiff was not validly elected. 22. One other argument may be shortly disposed of. It was said that the election was invalid as Moulvi Ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
