SITA RAM Vs. SHAHGANJ CONSUMERS CO-OPERATIVE STORES LTD
LAWS(ALL)-1959-4-6
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on April 01,1959

SITA RAM Appellant
VERSUS
SHAHGANJ CONSUMERS CO-OPERATIVE STORES LTD., ALLAHABAD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.S.Dhavan, J. - (1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for the quashing of an order made by Mr. H. R. Sahai, Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Allahabad, functioning as sole arbitrator between the petitioner Sita Ram and Shahganj Consumers Co-operative Stores Ltd. Allahabad, respondent No. 1 by which he allowed the claim of the aforesaid Co-operative Society against the petitioner for a sum of Rs. 5207/11/3 with interest at six per cent, from 6-5-1952.
(2.) The petitioner's case as alleged in the affidavit supporting the petition is this. He was employed as a shop Manager of a shop by the Shahganj Consumers Co-operative Stores Limited Allahabad. According to him he was merely a servant of the Society and not an officer. It appears that the Society accused the petitioner of having embezzled a large sum of money. The matter was referred to the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Allahabad, respondent No. 2 under Rule 115 of the U. P. Co-operative Societies Rules 1936. The petitioner at first appeared before the arbitrator but after one or two hearings absented himself. He sent a telegram to the arbitrator requesting him not to continue the arbitration proceedings as he did not recognise him as an arbitrator but the arbitrator ignored this request and continued the proceedings ex parte. After hearing the evidence produced on behalf of the Society he allowed the claim to the extent of Rs. 5207/11/3 with interest as stated above. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the proceedings before the arbitrator were entirely without jurisdiction as no reference could be made regarding a dispute between the Society and the petitioner who was "its servant. Learned counsel relied upon the statement in the petitioner's affidavit that he was a Shop Manager appointed by the Society on monthly salary for selling foodgrains in a shop run by the Society. Learned counsel contended that a Shop Manager could not be an officer. He relied upon the definition of the word 'officer' in Section 2(d) of the Co-operative Societies Act of 1912 read with Expl. 2 of Rule 115 of the U- P. Co-operative Societies Rules. Section 2(d) Is as follows: "Officer includes a chairman, secretary, treasurer, member of committee, or other person empowered under the rules or the byelaws to give directions in regard to the business of the society."
(3.) It is noteworthy that Clause (d) says that an officer "includes" a chairman and so on and not that it means a chairman. There is a difference between includes and means. The first is ordinarily illustrative, the second exhaustive. Thus the Categories enumerated in this clause are not exhaustive.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.