Tamil Nadu Chess Association Regd. No.81 of 2002 v. The District Registrar Office of the Registrar of Society & Ors.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED :: 08-02-2008CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.K.MISRAANDTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.TAMILVANANWRIT APPEAL Nos.4083 of 2003and 3728 of 2004and WA.M.P.No.7043 of 2004W.A.No.4083 of 2003Tamil Nadu Chess AssociationRegd. No.81 of 2002Rep. by its SecretaryMr.S.Veerajothi MuruganNo.110, Kottai Kalam Street,Allinagaram, Theni – 625 531. ...Appellant/Petitioner-vs-1.The District Registrar Office of the Registrar of Society, (Central Chennai), Seethammal Colony, Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018.2. Tamil Nadu Chess Association Regd. No.124 of 2002 Rep. by its General Secretary,Manneul Aaroan Hall No.75, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Chennai – 600 003. ...Respondents/RespondentsW.A.No.3728 of 2004Tamil Nadu Chess AssociationRegd. No.81 of 2002Rep. by its SecretaryMr.S.Veerajothi MuruganNo.110, Kottai Kalam Street,Allinagaram, Theni – 625 531. ...Appellant/4th Respondent https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ -vs-1. The Inspector General of Registration Office of the I.G. Of Registration, Santhome, Chennai – 4.2. The Registrar of Societies Central Chennai, Chennai – 18.3. The Registrar of Societies Periyakulam, Theni District.4. Tamil Nadu Chess Association Rep. by its General Secretary Mr.Manuel Aaran Hall No.75, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Chennai – 600 003. ...Respondents/Respondents 1 to 3 & PetitionerW.A.No.4083 of 2003 : Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the LettersPatent against the order dated 29.10.2003 made in W.P.No.7235 of 2003. W.A.No.3728 of 2004 : Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the LettersPatent against the order dated 29.10.2003 made in W.P.No.32077 of 2002.For appellant : Mr.G.S.Mohan in W.A.No.4083 of 2003 Mr.K.Sakthivel in W.A.No.3728 of 2004For respondents : Mr.I.Paranthaman, AGP for R1 in W.A.No.4083 of 2003 and for R1 to R3 in W.A.No.3728 of 2004 Mr.Sivam Sivanandaraj for R2 in W.A.No.4083 of 2003 and for R4 in W.A.No.3728 of 2004 COMMON JUDGMENTS.TAMILVANAN,JBoth the writ appeals have been preferred by Tamil Nadu ChessAssociation, Theni against the common order, dated 29.10.2003 passed bythe learned Single Judge. For convenience, the parties to both appealsare referred to, as arrayed in W.A.No.3728 of 2004. 2. Aggrieved by the order, dated 29.10.2003, passed in W.P.No.32077of 2002, the appellant herein has preferred W.A.No.3728 of 2004. Thesaid writ petition had been filed by the fourth respondent herein,whereby sought an order of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ records of the respondents, culminated in Order No.24391/II/2002, dated01.07.2002 of the first respondent and quash the same and to cancel theregistration made in PKM-81 of 2002, dated 29.04.2002 by the thirdrespondent in favour of the appellant herein to have the Associationregistered under the similar name "Tamil Nadu Chess Association", whichthe petitioner had already registered under the Tamil Nadu SocietiesRegistration Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order passed in W.P.No.7235 of 2003,W.A.No.4083 of 2003 has been filed. In the aforesaid writ petition, theappellant herein sought a direction in the nature of writ, under Article226 of the Constitution of India, declaring the order of registrationissued by the second respondent in his Proceedings No.124 of 2002, dated21.03.2002 in favour of the fourth respondent in the name of Tamil NaduChess Association, Chennai, as illegal, null and void and also to directthe second respondent to cancel the said registration.4. In both the appeals, the appellant is Tamil Nadu ChessAssociation, Reg. No.81 of 2002, No.110, Kottai Kalam Street,Allinagaram, Theni. The second respondent in W.A.No.4083 of 2003 and thefourth respondent in W.A.No.3728 of 2004 is Tamil Nadu ChessAssociation, Hall No.75, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Chennai-3. The firstrespondent in W.A.No.3728 of 2004 is the Inspector General ofRegistration, Chennai. The other respondents are The District Registrarsof Societies, Chennai and Theni.5. Tamil Nadu Chess Association, Chennai – 3, the fourth respondentherein, as petitioner in W.P.No.32077 of 2002 has questioned the orderof the first respondent, dated 01.07.2002, wherein he has stated that hehad applied for registration of the Association in the name of TamilNadu Chess Association to the Registrar of Societies, Central Chennai on13.02.2002 and after considering the application, the same wasregistered in Reg.No.134 of 2002 by order, dated 21.03.2002 by thesecond respondent. The appellant, having office at Theni also gotregistered on 29.04.2002 in the same name as Tamil Nadu ChessAssociation, Theni, in Registration No. 81 of 2002, with the DistrictRegistrar of Theni, much after the registration of the fourthrespondent's Association. Hence, the petitioner made a request to thefirst respondent for cancellation of the registration in favour of thefourth respondent, in view of Section 9 (1) (c) of the Tamil NaduSocieties Registration Act (herein after referred to as Act) and thesame was not considered. 6. It is not in dispute that as per Section 9 (1) (c) of the Act,no society shall be registered by a name, which in the opinion of theRegistrar is identical or so nearly resembles with the name by which,another society was already registered and is in existence. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

7. The appellant herein had applied for registration of itsAssociation at Periyakulam, Theni District on 23.01.2002 for registeringthe society in the name of Tamil Nadu Chess Association. However, thesaid request was rejected on 07.02.2002 by the third respondent, on theground that the appellant had used the name "Tamil Nadu", which was notpermissible under Section 9(2) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order, theappellant filed an appeal before the first respondent, Inspector Generalof Registration, on 26.02.2002 and the Inspector General ofRegistration, by his order, dated 22.04.2002, directed the DistrictRegistrar, Theni to register the association of the appellant,accordingly, the appellant's association was registered on 29.04.2002,which is not in dispute.8. The fourth respondent herein, Tamil Nadu Chess Association,Chennai – 3 had applied for registration of its society in the name ofTamil Nadu Chess Association on 13.02.2002 and after considering theapplication, the fourth respondent society was registered in the name ofTamil Nadu Chess Association in Registration No.124/02 by the order ofthe second respondent, dated 21.03.2002, which is also not in dispute.9. As contended by Mr.Sivam Sivanandaraj, learned counsel appearingfor the fourth respondent in W.A.No.3728 of 2004, the fourth respondentassociation was admittedly registered by the second respondent on21.03.2002, prior to the date of the registration of the appellant'sassociation by the third respondent on 29.04.2002.10. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted thatthough the appellant's association was registered on 29.04.2002, theapplication for such registration had been submitted before the thirdrespondent, District Registrar, Theni, on 23.01.2002 itself, prior to13.02.2002, the date on which the fourth respondent had submitted hisapplication before the second respondent at Chennai, and therefore,according to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, as per SubSection 2 of Section 72 of the Registration Act, 1908, the order of theappellate authority shall relate back to the date when the applicationwas presented by the appellant for registration and if that provision isadopted, the date of registration of the appellant's society on29.04.2002 shall relate back to the date of the application, namely23.02.2002 and in that event, the appellant shall be considered as theassociation registered prior to the registration of the fourthrespondent herein. It was further contended by the learned counselappearing for the appellant that as per Section 3 and 4 of the IndianEmblems and Names (Prevention of Improper use) Act, 1950, noregistration could be made in the name of Central Government or StateGovernment without prior permission of an Officer of either the State orCentral Government as authorised in this behalf by the Act. It is not indispute that the fourth respondent has not specifically obtained suchpermission from the Inspector General of Registration, the firstrespondent herein. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

11. In the case of the appellant, the application, dated 23.01.2002filed by the association was rejected by the third respondent, DistrictRegistrar, Theni, by his order dated 07.02.2002, on the ground that theassociation could not use the name "Tamil Nadu" saying that it was notpermissible under Section 9 (2) of the Act and therefore, the aforesaidappeal was preferred by the appellant before the Inspector General ofRegistration, the first respondent herein on 26.02.2002. The firstrespondent, by order dated 22.04.2002 directed the District Registrar,Theni to register the association of the appellant and accordingly, thesociety of the appellant was registered on 29.04.2002. In so far as thesubmissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant with referenceto Section 3 and 4 of the Indian Emblems and Names (Prevention ofImproper use) Act, 1950, as held by the learned single Judge, it is onlya restriction in using the emblems or seals or the names of the State orCentral Government in consonance with any trade activity and as such,the said provisions cannot be considered as a restriction imposed on anassociation involving in sports activities.12. It is an admitted fact that the appellant -society itself wasregistered only in the name of Tamil Nadu Chess Association, havingregistered their society in the name of Tamil Nadu Chess Association, itis not open to the appellant herein to contend that the fourthrespondent could not have registered its association in the name "TamilNadu Chess Association". Therefore, the objections raised by theappellant in view of Section 3 and 4 of Indian Emblems and Names(Prevention of Improper use) Act, 1950 is not legally sustainable.13. In the writ appeals, it has been admitted that the fourthrespondent association was registered by the second respondent in thename of Tamil Nadu Chess Association on 21.03.2002, where as theappellant's association was registered by the District Registrar ofSocieties, Theni, the third respondent herein, only on 29.04.2002,subsequent to the date of registration of the fourth respondentAssociation.14. In order to substantiate the legal aspects, following decisionswere relied on :1. Ramaswami Pillai vs. Ramasami Naicker, AIR 1960 Madras 3962. Ibrahim vs. A.G.Pancholi, AIR 1968 Gujarat 2723. V.M.Rao vs. Parameswari Ammal, AIR 1988 Madras 2304. Kuldip Singh vs. Balwant Kaur, AIR 1991 Punjab and Haryana 2915. Gurbax Singh vs. Kartar Singh, AIR 2002 SC 95915. In Gurbax Singh vs. Kartar Singh, reported in AIR 2002 SC 959,the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows : https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ " In view of the provisions of S.47 of theRegistration Act, 1908, it is well settled that adocument on subsequent registration will take effectfrom the time when it was executed and not from thetime of its registration. Where two documents areexecuted on the same day, the time of their executionwould determine the priority irrespective of the timeof their registration. The one which is executedearlier in time will prevail over the other executedsubsequently..."In the aforesaid case, respondent No.2 therein had executed twodocuments of sale. As per the finding of the courts below therein, onewas executed by the same vendor, earlier then the other document, thoughthe subsequent document was registered, prior to the earlier document.After the execution of the sale deed, the purchaser gets the right,after the legal formality of the registration from the date of itsexecution. Learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent submittedthat merely submitting an application before the District Registrar,Theni, the third respondent, will not create any right against the otherperson, who had already registered his society by the DistrictRegistrar, Central Chennai, the second respondent herein and therefore,the aforesaid facts and circumstances are not applicable for the instantcase.16. In the decision, V.M.Rao vs. Parameswari Ammal, reported in AIR1988 Madras 230, the Division Bench of this Court held in a case,wherein mortgage of property of minor was executed on 17.07.1967 andregistered on 19.07.1967, though permission of the Court was obtainedonly on 19.07.1969. As per Section 47 of the Registration Act (16 of1908), it was held by this Court that the mortgage was executed withoutobtaining prior permission and thus, the same was not covered by thepermission.17. In the decision Ibrahim vs. A.G.Pancholi, reported in AIR 1968Gujarat 272, it has been held under Section 47 of Registration Act 1908that according to Transfer of Property Act, transfer is effective fromthe date of instrument of transfer and not from the date ofregistration. 18. In the aforesaid cases, registration was only a legal formalityfor the transaction already taken place between the parties andtherefore, the rights of the parties have been decided on the date ofexecution of the documents, after the legal formality is over. In theinstant case, merely submitting an application for registration will notcreate any right on the appellant to claim any right against the fourthrespondent, who has got registration of his society, prior to the dateof registration of the aforesaid applicant. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

19. In view of Section 9 (1) (c) of the Tamil Nadu SocietiesRegistration Act, no society shall be registered by a name, which isidentical or so nearly resembles with the name, by which another societywas previously registered and is in existence. Merely because the appealpreferred by the appellant against the order of the third respondent,dated 07.02.2002 was allowed by the first respondent and the appellantgot the society registered on 29.04.2002, the appellant cannot claim itsregistration with retrospective effect from the date of application,which submitted on 23.01.2002 before the District Registrar,Periyakulam, Theni. Admittedly, the fourth respondent society has gotits association registered on 21.03.2002 itself, though the society hadsubmitted its application on 13.02.2002 before the second respondent,District Registrar of Societies, Central Chennai. It is also an admittedfact that the fourth respondent is no way responsible for the rejectionof its application on 07.02.2002 and getting registration on 29.04.2002by the District Registrar of Societies, Theni, the third respondentherein.20. Therefore, we are of the considered view that as per SubSection 2 of Section 72 of Registration Act, 1908, the order of theappellant authority shall not relate back the registration made on29.04.2002 to the date when the applicant had presented his applicationfor registration, detrimental to the interest of the other societynamely, the fourth respondent herein, which already got its registrationin the name of Tamil Nadu Chess Association by the second respondent. 21. On the facts and circumstances, it is clear that the appellantassociation was registered in the same name of Tamil Nadu ChessAssociation by the third respondent only on 29.04.2002, subsequent tothe registration of the fourth respondent association by the secondrespondent. In view of the fact that the registration of the fourthrespondent association had taken place on 21.03.2002, prior to theregistration of the appellant's Association, we could find no error orinfirmity in the impugned order, so as to warrant any interference inthe appeals. 22. In the result, both the writ appeals in W.A.No.4083 of 2003 and3728 of 2004 fail and accordingly, the same are dismissed. However,there is no order as to costs. Consequently, connected W.A.M.P.No.7043of 2004 is also dismissed.Sd/Asst.Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ tsvnTo1.The District Registrar Office of the Registrar of Society, (Central Chennai), Seethammal Colony, Alwarpet, Chennai – 600 018.2. The Inspector General of Registration Office of the I.G. Of Registration, Santhome, Chennai – 4.3. The Registrar of Societies Central Chennai, Chennai – 18.4. The Registrar of Societies Periyakulam, Theni District.1 cc To Mr.Sivam Sivanandaraj, Advocate, SR.6385.1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.6392.1 cc To Mr.K.Sakthivel, Advocate, SR.6389. W.A.Nos.4083 of 2003 and 3728 of 2004NG(CO)RVL 15.02.2008