AD – 10-11 Ct No.16 21.09.2026 (SSS) FMAT 392 of 2026 with CAN 1 of 2026 with FMAT 394 of 2026 with CAN 1 of 2026 Miss Aarti Khanna and Anr. Vs. Saurav Chatterjee and Ors. Mr. Krishnaraj Thakker, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shashwat Nayak, Mr. Siddhant Sharma, Mr. Abdul Zahid ....for the appellants. Mr. Ratnanko Banerji, Sr. Adv., Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee, Mr. Shaunak Mukhopadhyay, Mr. Samriddhi Sen, Ms. Rishika Goyel …for the respondent no. 14. 1. Affidavits of service in both the appeals, filed today, be kept on record. 2. The dispute in both the appeals pertains to a club, being incorporated under Section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013. 3. Insofar as FMAT 394 of 2026 is concerned, the same assails an order whereby a prayer in the nature of mandatory injunction permitting purportedly expelled members of the club to cast votes in the upcoming elections of the club has been refused. 4. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the appellants do not press the said appeal, without, however, any prejudice to their rights and contentions at the final hearing of the injunction application. 5. Accordingly, FMAT 394 of 2026 is dismissed as not pressed with liberty to the appellants take all grounds raised in the appeal at the final hearing of the temporary injunction application before the Trial Court. 6. CAN 1 of 2026 is consequentially dismissed as well. 7. No order as to costs. 8. FMAT 392 of 2026 relates to the refusal of a prayer for ad-interim injunction pertaining to an election of the club which has already been scheduled to be held through an Annual General Meeting of the club (company) under the aegis of a named scrutinizer. 9. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, inter alia, points out that thirty members of another club have been inducted on a 2 reciprocal basis which is contrary to the Memorandum and Articles of the club. 10. Insofar as twenty-five others are concerned, they have been inducted as probationary members, allegedly also in violation of the said Memorandum and Articles. 11. It is submitted that in the event the election is permitted to be proceeded on the premise of the present electoral roles, primarily prepared by the defendants/respondents, there is every possibility that there will be irregularity and violation of the Memorandum and Articles of the club in that regard, particularly since the aforementioned invalidly-inducted members would also be able to cast their votes in the proposed election. 12. Learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents, at the outset, submits that the suit and the appeal are not maintainable in their present form. That apart, it is submitted that under normal circumstances, unless a very high case is made out, a court of law does not interfere with the internal affairs of a club/company. 13. It is further assured by learned senior counsel for the respondents on instruction that the thirty reciprocal members complained of do not have voting rights and as such, nothing hinges insofar as the impending elections are concerned as far as 3 the induction of the said thirty members are concerned. 14. It is also denied that the probationary members, being nineteen in number (as opposed to the alleged twenty-five), even as per the list furnished with the temporary injunction application, do not have any voting rights unless they are made permanent. It is submitted that by the impugned notice dated June 16, 2026, only a proposal has been made to make the said probationary members permanent, subject to any objections being raised. 15. It is clarified by learned senior counsel for the respondents that probationary members also do not have the right to vote in the elections of the club. 16. At this juncture, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants submits that in order to ascertain the veracity of the said contentions of the respondents, the list of voters published for the upcoming elections is required to be circulated. 17. Learned senior counsel for the respondents submits that such list has already been circulated amongst some of the members. Be that as it may, the respondents are directed to serve a (further, if necessary) copy of the voters’ list to the learned 4 Advocate appearing for the appellants during the course of the day. 18. The matter shall be listed tomorrow (22.09.2026) for passing appropriate orders under the heading “Specially Fixed Matters”. 19. We make it clear that the above observations shall not automatically be construed to mean that the appeal has been admitted under Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. We further make it clear that the question of maintainability of the appeal and the suit are also left open to be argued and decided, if necessary. (Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.) (Sandip Kumar De, J.) 5