Chowdhry, J. - (1.) This is defndant's first appeal tinder Order 43, Rule 1 (u), C. P. Code, from an order of remand passed by the learned Small Cause Court Judge of Meerut on appeal from a decision of the Mun-sif of Meerut.
(2.) The plaintiff in this case was the Dewan Sugar Mills Sakoti Tanda and the defendant the Co-operative Development Union Limited at Sakoti Tanda, both being societies registered under the Co-operative Societies Act (II of 1912). Under Rule 115 of the Rules framed under Section 43 of the said Act any dispute touching the business of a registered society between, inter alia, two or more registered societies shall be decided either by the Registrar or by arbitration and shall for that purposes be referred -in writing to the Registrar. Explanation 1 of that rule provides that a dispute shall include claims for amounts due when a demand for payment is made and is either refused or not complied with whether such claims are admitted or not by the opposite party. Explanation 3 of that rule provides, Inter alia, that the business at a, society includes an matters relating to the objects of the society mentioned In the bye-laws. Under Rule 116 the Registrar on receipt of a reference shall either decide the dispute himself, or refer it for decision, among others, to an arbitrator.
(3.) The defendant Union used to supply sugarcane to the plaintiff Mills in the 1942-43-season. Prom 9-11-1942 to 30-11-1942 the supply was made at 0-8- per maund, but on or after the last mentioned date the defendant stopped the supply an a demanded payment of price at a 'higher rate. Certain negotiations between the parties followed thereafter, and the Government increased the rats from -/8- to /-10- per maund by a Notification dated 30-12-1942. On a dispute arising- between the parties as to the rate at which price of sugar-cane was payable for a certain period, the defendant referred the dispute to the Registrar for arbitration under Rule 115, and under Rule 116 the Registrar referred it for decision to the Cane Development Officer Ramjiwan Garg. The arbitrator gave an award on 7-2-1948 in favour of the defendant Union. The plaintiff Mills thereupon . appealed to the Registrar, arid the Registrar remanded the case on 2-9-1948. Thereupon 27-10-1948 was the date fixed for hearing before the arbitrator. A day before that the present suit was instituted for a declaration that the reference to arbitration, & proceedings following thereafter were illegal, ultra vires & unenforceable. Apart from challenging the legality of the reference, the plain-flff also alleged in the plaint that the defendant was not entitled to claim the price at the enhanc-ed rate. The defendant contested the suit pleading that his claim was well-founded, that the reference to arbitration was legal and that the civil court had no jurisdiction to adjudicate on the dispute between the parties.;