Maharashtra co-operative societies act, 1960.
Prakash S. B.
(Querist) 19 August 2013
This query is : Resolved
An Annual General Meeting of a Co-operative Housing Society was fixed on 12.08.2012. The business in respect of two items [ 1) Passing of accounts for the year 2011-2012 and (2) Approval for additional expenditure of Rs. 27.77 lacs spent on Road Repairs] could not be transacted as, admittedly, written objections were raised by some members present in the meeting on the main ground amongst others that the said amount of Rs. 27.77 lacs was spent without prior sanction of the general body. The said Meeting was, therefore, postponed. There was no disturbance or violence during the meeting and the situation was normal and peaceful. However, the Chairman presiding over the meeting committed default in postponing the meeting to any other suitable date not later than 30 days from the date of the meeting as may or could have been decided by the members present in the meeting. Thus, the Chairman failed to fix the date of the postponed Annual General Meeting and committed default in complying with Rule 60(8) of the M.C.S. Rules, 1961 and merely postponed the Meeting.
Even otherwise, the postponed Annual General Meeting was not called or held within or after 30 days from the date of the meeting. However, a Special General Meeting was called and held on 22.12.2012 in breach of Section 76(1) of the M.C.S. Act to transact business in respect of only one of the aforesaid two items i.e. Passing of accounts for the year 2011-2012. The business in respect of the second item [Approval for additional expenditure of Rs. 27.77 lacs spent on Road Repairs without prior sanction of the general body] of which Notice had been given for the Annual General Meeting held on 12.08.2012 was deleted and not taken up for consideration.
Sir, my queries are as follows:
In the circumstances stated above,
(1) Whether Sections 75(1), 75(4), 75(5) & 75(6) of the M.C.S. Act, 1960, are attracted as the Society committed default in complying with Rule 60(8) of the M.C.S. Rules, 1961 and Bye-law No. 103 of the Society?
(2)Even assuming that the Society has not committed breach of Section 76(1) of the Act, whether the Special General Meeting called and held on 22.12.2012 is illegal and untenable as the Society committed default in complying with Rule 60(8) of the M.C.S. Rules, 1961, read with By-law No. 103 of the Society?
ajay sethi
(Expert) 20 August 2013
1)managing committee has no powers to spend Rs 27 lakhs without obtaining prior approval of AGM . prior approval is a must . in the event AGM is postponed then it should have been held within period of 30 days as provided by law .
2)section 75(1) calls for calling of AGm within period of 3 months from finalisation of accounts
if it is not possible to do so you need to apply to registrar for extension of time for holding AGM . after receipt of order from Registrar meeting can be held within the extended period . in your case rules have been flouted with impunity by the society
3)if AGM is not held on time then members of Managing committee can be disqualified by the Registrar as provided under section 75(5)
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 20 August 2013
Well advised by the expert ajay sethi ji, nothing more to add.
M V Gupta
(Expert) 20 August 2013
As regards query 1 : As some of the agenda items could not be transacted, the Chairman and the Secretary ought to have got the date and time for the adjourned meeting fixed by the GB as required by Rule 60(8) read with bye law 103. As this was not done there is violation of these provisions. Section 75 (1)deals with convening of the AGM within the stipulated period, which was complied with by the Committee. As stated by you the accounts have been duly presented for adoption at the AGM. Hence this Sec also was complied with. Sub Sec (5) and (6) deal with the powers of the Registrar in case the Committee fails to convene the AGM within the stipulated period. Hence these provisions are not attracted.
Query 2: Neither the Act nor the Rules provide for the course of action to be followed in cases where the AGM has not fixed the date and time for the adjourned meeting. As such it would appear that the committee could have approached the Registrar for convening the same. Instead they have convened SGM which is not prohibited under the Rules or the bye laws.
In view of the above there does not appear any serious violations for which the Committee can be hauled up by the REgoistrar.
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 20 August 2013
nothing to add.
