MURALEEDHARAN Vs. KOORKANCHERY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Second Appeal arises from the judgment and decree of the I Additional Munsiff's Court, Thrissur in O.S.No.20 of 2003, modified by the II Additional Sub Court, Thrissur in A.S.No.322 of 2007.

(2.) THE respondent is a society registered in accordance with the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (for short, "the Act"). According to the respondent, the shop room belonging to it was entrusted to the appellant as per Ext.A1, rent deed dated 01.06.1998 for a period of 11 months on condition of payment of Rs.1,100/- per month. THE period of rental arrangement expired by 30.04.1999. According to the respondent, rent is in arrears from September, 2000 onwards. THE respondent issued notice on 19.01.2002 terminating tenancy and demanding payment of rent arrears. THE respondent also pleaded that Act 2 of 1965 has no application since the building belonging to the respondent which is a co-operative society is exempted from the application of the said Act by virtue of notification issued under Sec.25 of the said Act.

(3.) IT is not disputed that the respondent is a society registered under the Act. IT is not as if every dispute is referable to the Registrar under Sec.69 of the Act and the suit is barred under Sec.100 of the said Act. The 'dispute' as defined in Sec.2(i) of the Act must be one touching upon the business, establishment or management of the society. I stated from Ext.A7 that letting out buildings of the respondent is not part of its business. The Supreme Court has also stated that if a building belonging to the society and which is not required for its use is let out, that cannot be part of the business of the society. That decision also applies to the facts of the case. In the circumstances the trial and first appellate courts are right in concluding that the dispute as to whether the appellant is liable to be evicted from shop room is not a 'dispute' coming under Sec.2(i) of the Act so that, Sec.69 or Sec.100 of the Act would apply.