http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3  

PETITIONER: PANCHSHILA INDUSTRIAL CO-OPERA-TIVE SOCIETIES(MULTI UNIT)

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: GURGAON CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANKLTD.  GURGAON

DATE OF JUDGMENT06/08/1971

BENCH: SIKRI, S.M. (CJ) BENCH: SIKRI, S.M. (CJ) RAY, A.N. PALEKAR, D.G.

CITATION:  1971 AIR 2403            1972 SCR  (1)  44

ACT: Punjab  Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, s.  55-Multi  Unit Co-operative Societies Act, 1942-Latter Act has no impact on s.  55  of the former Act-Central  Registrar  not  appellate authority  against award in respect of disputes between  co- operative  society  governed by Punjab Act of 1961  and  its member.

HEADNOTE: The  respondent bank is a co-operative society  governed  by the  Punjab  Co-operative Societies Act,  1961.   A  dispute between the bank and the appellant, one of its members,  was referred  by  the Registrar of  Co-operative  Societies,  in exercise of the powers vested in him by s. 55 of the Act, to the    Deputy   Registrar,   Co-operative   Societies    for arbitration.   The  appellant filed an  appeal  against  the award   before   the  Central  Registrar   of   Co-operative Societies.   The  Central  Registrar  dismissed  the  appeal holding that he was not the appropriate appellate authority, under  the Act.  In appeal to this Court the appellant  con- tended  that it was registered in 1955 under the Punjab  Co- operative  Societies  Act 1955 and by virtue of  the  States Reorganisation  Act, 1956 and s. 5(A) of the Multi-Unit  Co- operative Societies Act, 1942, it had ceased to be  governed by the provisions of the Punjab Co-operative Societies  Act, because,  it had become a multi-unit  co-operative  Society. Dismissing the appeal, HELD : There is nothing in the provisions of the  Multi-unit Cooperative Societies Act to indicate that a multi-unit  co- operative  society  cannot  be a member  of  a  co-operative society governed by the Punjab Act of 1961.  The multi  unit co-operative   societies  Act  is  for  the   incorporation, regulation  and  winding up of co-operative  societies  with objects not confined to one State and it has no impact on s. 55  of  the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961,  in  as much  as the appellant remains a member of the  Co-operative Society,  namely,  the respondent bank.   If  the  appellant continues to be a member then the terms of s. 55 apply and a dispute  can be referred to arbitration under that  section. An appeal against that award lies under s. 68 of the  Punjab Act  of 1961 to the government if the decision or order  was made  by the Registrar and to the Registrar if the  decision

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3  

or order is made by any other person.  Therefore the Central Registrar had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. [46H]

JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2293 of 1970.  45 Appeal by special leave, from the order dated May 4, 1970 of the  Central Registrar of Co-operative Societies, New  Delhi in Appeal No. CR/1/70. Harbans Singh, for the appellant. Remeshwar Dial and A.D. Mathur, for the respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Sikri,  C.  J.-This appeal by special leave is  against  the order of the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies  New Delhi  dismissing the appeal filed by Panchshila  Industrial Cooperative Society (Multi Unit) appellant before us against the  award  passed by the Arbitrator  (Deputy  Registrar  of Cooperative  Societies  Rohtak) dated October  7,  1969,  in respect   of  the  dispute  between  the   Gurgaon   Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Gurgaon respondent before us, and the appellant.   The Central Registrar held that he was not  the appropriate   appellate  authority  against  the  award   in question. The  only  question which arises before us  is  whether  the Central Registrar was the appropriate authority on the facts of this case.  The relevant facts are these.  The respondent Bank  approached  the  Registrar  of  Cooperative  Societies Haryana for resolving a dispute between the Bank and one  of its members appellant before us.  The Registrar by his order dated February 17, 1968, in exercise of the powers vested in him  under S. 56 of the Punjab Co-operative  Societies  Act, 1961,   referred  the  dispute  to  the   Deputy   Registrar Cooperative  Societies Rohtak for decision.  The  arbitrator gave  the  award  on October 7,  1969,  directing  that  the appellant do pay to the respondent in all Rs. 16,05,658 - 20 together  with  interest at the rate of six and a  half  per cent per annum until the realisation of the principal amount viz.  Rs. 11,52,535  00. The  appellant  as mentioned above filed an  appeal  against this  award  before the Central Registrar.   The  respondent Bank is a co-operative society governed by the provisions of the  Punjab Co-operative Societies Act 1961.  Section  55(1) of this Act inter alia provides that if any dispute touching the  constitution  management  or  the  business  of  a  co- operative society arises between a member 46 and  the society such dispute shall be referred to  the  Re- gistrar for decision and no Court shall have jurisdiction to entertain  any suit or other proceeding in respect  of  such dispute.   Section 55(2) provides that for the  purposes  of sub-section  (1) a claim by the society for any debt or  de- mand  due to it from a member or the nominee heirs or  legal representatives  of a deceased member whether such  debt  or demand  be admitted or not, shall be deemed to be a  dispute touching the constitution, management or the business of the co-operative  society.   Sub-section (3) of S.  55  provides that  "if any question arises whether a dispute referred  to the  Registrar  under this section is or is  not  a  dispute touching  the constitution management or the business  of  a cooperative  society, the decision thereon of the  Registrar shall  be final and shall not be called in question  in  any court." There  is no doubt that the dispute between  the  respondent

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3  

Bank  and the appellant fell within S. 55 and  was  properly referred to arbitration under that section.  It is  however, contended that the appellant was registered in December 1955 under  the  Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1955,  and  by virtue of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, and S. 5A  of the   Multi-Unit  Co-operative  Societies  Act,  1942,   the appellant has ceased to be governed by the provisions of the Punjab  Co-operative Societies Act because it has  become  a multi-unit co-operative society.  There is no doubt that  by virtue of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, and S. 5A  of the  Multi-Unit  Co-operative  Societies,  Act,  1942,   the appellant  has become a multi-unit co-operative society  and the  Multi-Unit  Co-operative Societies Act applies  to  it. But  that  Act  is for  the  incorporation,  regulation  and winding  up  of  co-operative  societies  with  objects  not confined to one State, and it has no impact on S. 55 of  the Punjab  Co-operative  Societies Act, 1961, inasmuch  as  the appellant  remains  a member of  the  co-operative  society, namely,  the  respondent  Bank.  There  is  nothing  in  the provisions  of the Multi-Unit Co-operative Societies Act  to indicate that a multi-unit co-operative society cannot be  a member of a co-operative society governed by the Punjab  Act of  1961.  If the appellant continues to be a  member,  then the  terms of S. 55 apply and a dispute can be  referred  to arbitration  under that section.  An appeal against  the  at award lies under S. 68 of the Punjab Act of  47 1961 to the Government of the decision or order was made  by the Registrar, and to the Registrar if the decision or order was made by any other person.  It is quite clear  therefore, that  the Central Registrar had no jurisdiction to hear  the appeal.  The   learned  counsel  next  contends  that  the   Central Registrar should not have dismissed the appeal but  returned the  memorandum  of appeal for presentation  to  the  proper authority.   There  is no statutory provision  enabling  the Central  Registrar to do so.  At any rate, if an  appeal  is filed before the appropriate authority under the Punjab  Co- operative Societies Act, 1961, that authority will no  doubt take  into  consideration  the provisions of S.  14  of  the Limitation Act, 1963, read with S. 29(2) and decide  whether the appeal should be entertained or not. In the result the appeal fails and is dismissed with costs. K.B.N.                      Appeal dismissed. 48