RAMKRISHNA SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LTD Vs. EGRA THANA CO OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SOCIETY LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A question which, inter alia, arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether a subsequent arbitrator appointed by the Registrar of Co-operative Society can consider the evidences brought by the parties before the previous arbitrator.

(2.) The basic fact giving rise to the aforementioned question is as follows :- On or about 14th June, 1995 the appellant filed a dispute case against the respondent No. 1 before the Registrar, Co-operative Society for recovery of certain amount which was registered as Dispute Case No. 54/95-96. The Registrar instead of resolving the said dispute himself appointed one Sri Arun Kumar Das, respondent No. 9 herein as an Arbitrator. Admittedly the said Arbitrator could not pass an award within the prescribed period but the said respondent proceeded with the hearing of the said dispute being Dispute Case No. 54/95-96 between 23rd June, 1995 to 19th May, 1997. Keeping in view the fact that no award could be made within the aforementioned period, the respondent No. 7 returned the said records of the Dispute Case to the said Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Society, Midnapore-III without passing any order. By an order dated 7th October, 1997 Sri S.K. Maity, respondent No. 8 herein was appointed as an Arbitrator by the Registrar. He held the proceedings between 4th November, 1997 to 16th March, 1998 and passed an award on the said date. The respondents Nos. 1 and 2 filed a writ petition which was registered as W.P. 6285 (W) of 1998, questioning the validity of the said award passed by the respondent No. 8. The learned Judge appears to have heard the matter on 6th April and 16th April, 1998 and keeping in view the question of law involved in the application; by reason of the impugned order dated 30th April, 1998 it allowed the said writ petition by setting aside the said order dated 16th March 1998 on the ground that the Arbitrator had passed the award after expiry of the time prescribed under sections 95 and 96 of the Co-operative Societies Act.

(3.) Mr. K.D. Mukherjee, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that as the second arbitrator has passed the award within the period prescribed under sections 95 and 96 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, the same could not have been quashed. The learned counsel submitted that from a perusal of the records of the proceedings maintained by the Arbitrator it would appear that the respondent No. 8 had summoned the parties and called for a large number of documents which were taken in evidence and in that view of the matter, no exception to the said award could be taken.