LAWS(PVC)-1934-10-1

MADHUSUDNAN DAS Vs. MATHURANANDA DAS

Decided On October 03, 1934
MADHUSUDNAN DAS Appellant
V/S
MATHURANANDA DAS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is a member of the Shyamsunderpur Co-operative Society. This society borrowed money from the Co-operative Central Bank of Kendrapara and lent that money to the appellant. An award was obtained by the Central Bank against the society, whereupon the society made a reference to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, who gave an award against the appellant for the sum of money which he had borrowed. When the award was put into execution in the civil Court the appellant objected that it had been made by the Registrar without jurisdiction. This objection was overruled both by the execution Court and by the District Judge on an appeal from the order of the former Court. The question whether the Registrar had jurisdiction to make the award or not depends upon the interpretation of Rule 12 of the rules made under the Co-operative Societies Act. The relevant portion of the rule is as follows: (1) In the case of a dispute touching the business of the society between members or past members of the society or persons claiming through a member or past member or between a member or past member or person so claiming and the Committee or any officer, a reference in writing shall be made by any party to the Registrar ... (4) After hearing the parties to the dispute and examining such witness and documentary evidence as may be produced, the Registrar ... shall give a decision or award in writing. (5) Such decision or award shall, on application to the civil Court having local jurisdiction, be enforceable as a decree of such Court.

(2.) There seems to me to be no reason to doubt that the disputed liability of a member to repay money due to the society is a dispute touching the business of the society and, being a dispute between one member and the remaining members, it is covered by 01. 1 of the rule which provides for such disputes between the members inter se. In my opinion the order of the Registrar was not without jurisdiction and I would accordingly dismiss the appeal with costs. Varma, J.

(3.) I agree.