BANK OFFICERS AND OFFICIALS HOUSE BUILDING CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED BANGALORE Vs. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES III CIRCLE BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, assailing the correctness of the order dated 11-6-2004 in appeal No. 836 of 2000 on the file of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, bangalore vide Annexure-B and also the order dated 25-9- 2000 in dispute no. ARB/50/abn/7/93-94 passed by the 1st respondent insofar as it relates to paying of interest, has presented this writ petition.

(2.) THE undisputed facts of the case are that the 2nd respondent being a member of the petitioner-Society, filed an application for allotment of a site and had paid the entire sital value. In spite of the same, the petitioner-Society has failed to allot a site in her favour. Hence, the 2nd respondent was constrained to issue a notice dated 26-2-1992 demanding refund of the amount paid by her. The said request has been rejected by the petitioner-Society and hence, the 2nd respondent raised a dispute under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (hereinafter called as the 'act') before the 1st respondent in dispute No. ARB/50/abn/7/93-94. The Arbitrator, after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on the file, has allowed the dispute and directed the petitioner-Society to refund a sum of Rs. 42,581/- with interest at 21% p. a. , by his order dated 25-9-2000. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner-Society filed an appeal on the file of the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 836 of 2000. The said appeal had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 11-6-2004. The Tribunal, after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence and the order passed by the Arbitrator and also placing reliance on the order passed by this Court dated 10-3-2000 in W. P. No. 35597 and connected matters, has partly allowed the appeal and modified the award to the extent of interest only holding that the rate of interest should be read as 12% p. a. instead of 21% p. a. Assailing the correctness of the orders passed by both the authorities, the petitioner-Society has presented this writ petition.

(3.) THE principal submission canvassed by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that, the petitioner-Society is not at all liable to pay any interest and that there is no agreement with the 2nd respondent for payment of interest. He submitted that the 2nd respondent has failed to pay the sital value well in time. He further submitted that the application filed by the 2nd respondent for refund of deposit was placed before the General Body of the petitioner-Society and the said request has been rejected. He also submitted that pending adjudication of the dispute, the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs. 15,000/- before the 1st respondent and thereafter, the remaining amount of Rs. 26,700/- has been refunded to the 2nd respondent on 23-7-2004 vide Cheque No. 735717. He further submitted that it is open for the 2nd respondent to withdraw Rs. 15,000/- deposited before the 1st respondent. Further, he vehemently submitted that there is no deficiency of service by the petitioner-Society. He therefore submitted that the impugned orders passed by both the authorities are not sustainable and the same are liable to be set aside.