The gist of the Court case between HOA V/S Sher Singh Barshami & others in CR No.4720 of 2014 is as under:-
The main bone of contention in the present case is that two factions are claiming the right of managing the affairs of Haryana Olympic Association. The group headed by Sh. P.V. Rathee is claiming legitimacy by virtue of elections held on 22.09.2012 whereas the defendants group headed by Sh. Sher Singh Barshami legitimacy by virtue of elections dated 12.07.2012. In order to decide the matter in controversy, it has to be seen that which of the governing bodies was duly elected but the same is a matter of fact and can only be decided when evidence on behalf of both the parties is lead. So far as the present stay application is concerned, this court has to draw support from order dated 24.12.2008 passed by Ms. Anshu Shukla, Ld. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Panchkula whereby the defendants were restrained from interfering into the functioning of plaintiff association headed by Sh. P.V Rathee. The Ld. Civil Court impliedly also held that the association headed by Sh. P.V. Rathee was validly elected and the above referred order of a competent Civil Court was upheld upto the Hon'ble High Court and the governing body headed by Sh. P.V. Rathee continued to discharge its duties till 2012. A dispute arose in the year 2012, when the governing body headed by Sh. P.V. Rathee claimed that they have been re-elected and on the other hand the defendants claimed that they have been elected on 12.07.2012. The factum of election in the year 2012, whether validly conducted or not, can be effectively adjudicated when evidence on behalf of the parties is led. At this initial stage, this court is of the considered view that if the plaintiffs are not granted the relief as claimed then the purpose of filing the present suit shall become infructuous. The governing body headed by Sh. P.V. Rathee continued to discharge its duties in the plaintiff association and if the defendants claim that now they constitute a validly elected body then they have to prove so by leading cogent evidence. Thus in order to prevent multiplicity of litigation the present stay application is allowed and the
defendants are restrained from acting as office bearers of plaintiff association, using the name/goodwill of the plaintiff association, using the name of plaintiff association for seeking or continuing affiliation and recognition with any government department or any national or international sports body, using the name, banner, emblem or any document etc. of plaintiff association in any manner specially for conducting State games or representing the State of Haryana in the National or International Games, from participating in election of the governing body of the Olympic association or inducting with any government department or any National or International sports body, from conducting and managing any sports events or games at Haryana State Level or District Level, from doing any acts in the name and style of Haryana Olympic Association or posing to anybody or authority or before Indian Olympic Association and from collecting/receiving any funds, donations in money or kind from anybody or public, till the final decision of the case on merits.
9. It is pertinent to mention here that nothing in this order will effect the merits of the case when it is taken for final decision.
Announced in open court. (Amit Verma)
Dated 14.11.2013 Civil Judge (Jr. Division)
Note:- All seven pages of this order have been checked and signed by me.
(Amit Verma) Civil Judge (Jr. Division) Panchkula.14.11.2013