REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES Vs. RAGHUBIR RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is defendants second appeal against a judgment of reversal. The plaintiff, Raghubir Ram, respondent 1 in this second appeal, brought a suit against the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and others for a declaration that a certain award obtained by defendant 4 who was a liquidator was illegal, ineffective and liable to be set aside. There was an alternative prayer that the property belonging to the plaintiff and sold by the liquidator might be returned to the plaintiff on payment of Rupees 297/5/- for which the property had been sold.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff-respondent may be briefly stated us follows: There was a Central Co-operative Bank at Buxar and this had gone under liquidation. Defendant 1 the Registrar of Co-operative Societies in Bihar, appointed defendants 2 and 3 the Official Liquidators for the discharge of the duties of the Bank. Under the said Central Co-operative Bank there was a Co-operative Society in Bekion, thana Nawanagar. The Official Liquidators took possession of the assets of this Society. Defendant was the liquidator for this Society at the beginning, but defendants 2 and 8 subsequently took charge from him. One Yusuf Mia was a member of the aforementioned Belaon Co-operative Society. He had taken a loan from the Society and the name of the plaintiff appears in the books of the Society as surety for this Yusuf Mian although as a matter of fact he did not offer himself as such. Defendant is as liquidator determined the contribution payable by the plaintiff without giving the plaintiff the notice to which he was entitled. Rs. 297/5 was the contribution thus fixed. Later on the order of the liquidator was executed and the property of the plaintiff was put up for sale. Having come to know of the impending sale and in order to save his property worth Rs. 3000 the plaintiff approached the registrar and offered to pay the amount of Rs. 297/5 to the department. The Cooperative department allowed the matter to drag on until at last the property of the plaintiff was sold and it was purchased by the liquidator. After the sale defendant 1 the registrar, agreed to return the property to the plaintiff if the latter made full payments of all his dues to the Cooperative department. The plaintiff was all along willing to pay the amount, but the defendants backed out of the contract and did not restore the property to the plaintiff. Failing to obtain any remedy at the hands of the defendants, the plaintiff served a notice on them under Section 80, Civil P.C. Cause of action according to the plaintiff accrued for the first time on 24th-January 1940 when the award was prepared.

(3.) The suit brought by the plaintiff-respondent was contested by all the defendants who filed separate written statements. It was denied that the plaintiff had any cause of action. The allegation in the plaint that the name of the plaintiff was fraudulently inserted in the loan register of the Society was denied. It was further case of the defendants that the liquidator determined the question of contribution after giving full opportunity to all persons concerned. It was also the defence case that there was no completed contract for the return of the property sold at the instance of the liquidator. Upon the pleadings of the parties the learned Munsif who tried the suit framed three issues of which the first was whether the award dated 24 January 1940 is illegal and liable to be set aside. The second issue was whether the plaintiff is entitled to get back the properties in suit after payment of Rs. 297/5. The last issue was whether the plain, tiffs are entitled to any reliefs.