I R HINGORANI Vs. PRAVINCHANDRA KANTILAL SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by certificate. Respondent No.1 is the owner of Flat No.20-B on the 5th floor of the building by name "Shalimar" situate at Marine Drive, Bombay. On April 24, 1959 he entered into an agreement called "Leave and licence agreement" with the appellant under which he was permitted to occupy that flat at a monthly "compensation" of Rupees 250/-. On May 5, 1959, the appellant occupied the flat in pursuance of that agreement. In 1962 a co-operative society by name "New Shalimar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd". was formed. Thereafter Responent No.1 became a member of that society. To be exact he became a member of that society on January 26, 1962. On March 28, 1963 the appellant filed an application under Section 11 of the Bombay Rent Act before the Small Causes Court, Bombay for fixing the standard rent of the flat occupied by him. Respondent No.1 filed his objections to that suit on August 5, 1963. In his objections statement he pleaded inter alia (1) that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between him and the appellant and (2) Civil Courts had no jurisdiction to go into the dispute between the appellant and the respondent. During the pendency of that suit Respondent No.1 moved the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies for referring the dispute between him and the appellant to arbitration. The Registrar entertained that application and appointed one of his subordinates as his nominee. The Registrar's nominee summoned the appellant to appear before him on July 28, 1963. On July 28, 1963 the appellant appeared before him and contended that he had no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute. The Registrar's nominee overruled that objection. Thereafter the appellant went up in appeal to the Assistant Registrar. The Assistant Registrar dismissed his appeal. Aggrieved by that decision the appellant went up to the High Court of Maharashtra under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High Court dismissed his petition. It came to the conclusion that the dispute in question fell within the scope of Section 91(1) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, which will be hereinafter referred to as "the Act".

(2.) Section 91 (1) to the extent material for our purpose reads thus:

(3.) In the case before us when the agreement was entered into between the appellant and Respondent No.1 as seen earlier, Respondent No.1 was not a member of the Society. In fact the New Shalimar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. was not even in existence on that date. That being the case we have to consider whether the present dispute can be said to fall within the scope of Section 91 of the Act.