LAWS(GJH)-2017-2-272

BHARAT COLD DEPOT Vs. VERAVAL PEOPLES COOPERATIVE BANK

Decided On February 20, 2017
Bharat Cold Depot Appellant
V/S
Veraval Peoples Cooperative Bank Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 15.03.2013 passed by the Gujarat State Cooperative Tribunal (the Tribunal) in Review Application No.16 of 2010 preferred by respondent no.1.

(2.) It appears that respondent no.1 - original plaintiff filed Lavad Case No.111 of 1994 before the Board of Nominee seeking to recover Rs.8,53,033.71 paisa from the petitioners. The Board of Nominee by its award dated 06.10.2009 ordered the petitioners to pay Rs.1,75,706.09 paisa with 17% simple interest and cost of Rs.5080/- within 30 days and further ordered that on petitioners' failure to pay such amount, respondent no.1 - original plaintiff shall be entitled to recover the said amount with 17% compound interest. The Board of Nominee has also ordered that the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- paid by the petitioners pending the suit should be given set off / adjustment in payment of the above said amount of Rs.1,75,706.09 paisa. It appears that such award of the Board of Nominee was challenged before the Tribunal by respondent no.1. However, the Tribunal by its judgment and order dated 18.02.2010 dismissed the appeal. The respondent no.1 then preferred review application before the Tribunal which came to be allowed with an order that the order dated 18.02.2010 passed by the Tribunal in Appeal No.273 of 2009 is set aside and by reviewing the decision, it is ordered that the Appeal No.273 of 2009 is allowed and the award dated 06.10.2009 made by the Board of Nominee in Lavad Case No.111 of 1994 is declared illegal and set aside in part and by modifying the said award, the petitioners are ordered to pay an amount of Rs.8,53,033.71 paisa with 17% simple interest from the date of the suit i.e. 20.09.1994 till the amount is recovered.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr.Shirish Joshi for the petitioners submitted that though no ground was made out for reviewing the order passed in appeal, the Tribunal allowed the review application. Mr.Joshi submitted that the grounds taken in the review application are the grievances against the award made by the Board of Nominee and the review was not sought for any error or mistake of the Tribunal apparent on the face of the record when the appeal was decided or on discovering of important and new material which require review of the order or for any sufficient reason. Mr.Joshi submitted that though no such grounds were taken by respondent no.1, the Tribunal allowed the review application as if it was, for the first time, deciding the appeal on merits and in review by finding fault with the award made by the Board of Nominee, the appeal was allowed. He submitted that such course adopted by the Tribunal is in excess of jurisdiction vested with the Tribunal in the context of powers of review available under section 151 of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act ("the Act"). He, therefore, urged to allow the petition and set aside the impugned order made by the Tribunal.