Decided on July 19,1955

G.S. Rama Rao And Others Appellant
Deputy Registrar Of Co Respondents


- (1.)The Order of the Court was delivered by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bhimasankaram.
(2.)The petitioner in this Writ Petition is the would-be promoter of a Co-operative Society called the Motor Transport Owners' Benefit Co-operative Society, Eluru. He sought registration of the society and submitted an application for such registration to the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Eluru. His application was rejected by an order of the Deputy Registrar, which runs as follows:-
"This is an application for a novel kind of Co-operative Society namely, a Co-operative Society on the basis of limited liability with its area of operations extending to all the northern circar districts with the main objects of

(a) doing insurance business in respect of the motor vehicles owned by the members;

(b) of stocking and supplying imported chassis, motor spare parts etc., to the members; and

(c) borrowing funds for issue of loans to members in the shape of vehicles supplied on hire purchase system.

The scheme involves a huge capital and is intended to benefit, persons of limited means, but owners of fleets of transport vehicles who are, with few exceptions, fairly rich. The benefit is harmonious with the spirit of the Co-operative Societies Act. Its objects are also multifarious and, in my opinion, are practicable. The application for registration of the Society is therefore refused."

(3.)Section 10 of the Act provides for a right of appeal to the Government against an order of the Deputy Registrar refusing registration. Such an appeal was filed by the petitioner but the Government rejected the appeal in a laconic order without giving any reasons whatsoever. It is contended by Mr. Sankara Rao for the petitioner that the Deputy Registrar in passing the order, that he did, did act in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the rules made thereunder. He argues that it is a valid objection to the registration of a Co-operative Society that it is intended to benefit "fairly rich" persons, nor is it a valid objection to say that its objects are multifarious. It is also urged that there is nothing either in the objects of the society or in the by-laws proposed to indicate that the benefit is "not harmonious with the spirit of the Co-operative Societies Act". The objection that the objects are practicable is also unsustainable it is argued, because it is raised in a manner in conformity with the rules.

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