B.P.SINGH Vs. RAMESH CHANDRA RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned counsel for opposite party No. 1.

(2.) A perusal of the copy of plaint contained in Annexure no. 1 shows that the suit for permanent injunction has been filed on the simplicitor ground that the plaintiff is legal owner of the suit property.? Mode of ownership has been described from para-3 to para- 7, in which all the contents have been mentioned.? The defendants are indulging in fraudulent act, as such, defendant No. 1 has again executed the subsequent sale-deed in favour of the defendant Nos. 2 to 5 and, as such, the execution was being processed and the suit was filed under Section 111 of U.P. Co-operative Societies Act. Section 111 of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act is reproduced below:-

(3.) In view of this provision, the Civil Court shall not have jurisdiction to try a case where registration of a Co-operative Society or its bye-laws are, in question or the subject-matter relate to supersession or suspension of Management Committee, or any dispute under Section 70 has been preferred to any order or award made under this Act.? The learned trial Court rightly observed that this is a suit relating to property dispute.