The court has declined prayer for interim relief stating that they would not interfere in the internal issues of an association/party. The General Council is shown to be the apex body of the party, and the hyper-technical suggestions made about the want of valid notice do not further the cause of the appellants. The court granted interim injunction in favour of the General Secretary against convening a parallel meeting, but no parallel meeting of General Council has been called for or requisitioned by any of the Members. The court has observed that requisitionists have no option but only to go to the court if the meeting is not convened. The learned Single Judge has proceeded contrary to the sound and applicable judicial principles by issuing an injunction that could only perpetuate the functional deadlock in the party.

“As to how any compact, be it an association or be it a political party, would manage its affairs and what alterations its governing body would consider appropriate in its rules, regulations or byelaws, are all the matters squarely within the domain of that compact and its governing body.”

THIRU K. PALANISWAMY ….APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
M. SHANMUGAM & ORS. ….RESPONDENT(S)
decided by the Hon’Ble Supreme Court on Feb.,23, 23.

By aor.sanjivnarang@gmail.com

Sanjiv Narang Adv. is an Advocate on Record in the Supreme Court of India. His qualifications include an LLB from University of Delhi and a Masters degree in Personnel Management from Panjab University,Chandigarh.In his more than 3 decades of experience, he has practiced law at the District, High Court and Supreme Court levels.He also has more than a decade of experience in the field of Management. He is the author of two books namely Laws for Women in India and Innovation, Why What and How.