Ruma Pal, J. - (1.) The petitioner has challenged an award passed by the Respondent No. 1 on 22-5-1992 in ARC No. 401/91-92 under section 55 and 56 of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Cooperative Societies Regulation 1973 (referred to as the Regulation).
(2.) A claim has been made against the petitioner by the Respondent No. 2 as the surety of a loan granted by the Respondent No. 2. The claim was referred to the Respondent No. 1 under section 56of the Regulation. It appears that the petitioner sought to represent his case before the Respondent No. 1 through Advocate. The petitioner also applied for xerox copies of the documents relied upon by the Respondent No. 2.
(3.) By an order dated 24-3-1992 the Respondent No. 1 rejected both the petitioner's prayers. The first prayer was rejected for four reasons namely - (i) The object of Section 56 of the Regulation was a speedy settlement of disputes unhampered by technical rules of procedure. (ii) There was no express provision in the Regulation allowing a party to be represented by a legal practitioner. (iii) The Arbitration Act, 1940 also did not provide for representation through Counsel. (iv) The dispute was simple and the defence was limited to the question of admission or denial of the case. The second prayer was rejected on the ground that the party could inspect the documents at the hearing.;