KAN SINGH, J. - (1.) THIS is a plaintiff's second appeal and arises out of a suit for money filed against the defendant-respondent, who is a Cooperative Society registered under the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act" ).
(2.) THE plaintiff-appellant is a member of the respondent Cooperative Society. On 28th August, 1961, he claims to have deposited Rs. 1,000/- by way of trust with the Society and obtained a pass-book on 25-2-71. THE plaintiff-appellant gave a notice to the respondent-Society for the refund of the amount. Since the amount was not refunded, the plaintiff brought the suit against the Society in the Court of the Additional Munsif, Udaipur. THE Society contested the suit. It was admitted that Rs. 1000/-had been deposited by the plaintiff with the Society, but it was denied that it was by way of trust and it was asserted that it was an advance for the purpose of house according to the arrangement with the Society. It was further pleaded that the suit was not maintainable according to sec. 75 of the Act, as it concerned a dispute between a member of the Society and the Society and such a dispute was required to be referred to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies and consequently the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. It was also pleaded that the suit was not maintainable, as the statutory notice to the Registrar had not been given as required by sec. 143 of the Act. The learned Addl. Munsif came to the conclusion that the dispute did not relate to the business of the Society as the amount was not deposited by the plaintiff to the Society in the capacity as a member. The learned Addl. Munsif further held that as the suit was not relating to the business of the Society, no notice was required to be given under sec. 143 of the Act. In the result he decreed the suit. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Munsif the defendant-Society went up in appeal to the Court of the District Judge, Udaipur. The appeal was assigned by the District Judge to the learned Civil Judge, Udaipur, for disposal. The learned Civil Judge held that the dispute related to the business of the Society and was between the plaintiff, who was the member of the Society and the Society and, therefore, sec. 75 of the Act was attracted. He also held that two months' notice to the Registrar, as laid down in sec. 143 of the Act, was required before the filing of the suit. Consequently, the learned Civil Judge allowed the appeal and reversed the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Munsif and remanded the case to him for returning the plaint to the plaintiff. It is in these circumstances that the plaintiff has come in further appeal to this Court. Learned counsel for the plaintiff appellant reiterated that the dispute between the plaintiff and the Society not being as a member of the Society sec. 75 of the Act was not attracted and, therefore, the suit was competent in a civil court. Learned counsel relied on: - (1) Manjeri S. Krishna Ayyar vs. Secy. , Urban Bank, Ltd. , Calicut (l); (2) Shyam Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. vs. Ramibai Bhagwansing Advani (2); and (3) Deccan Merchants Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs. M/s. Dalichand Jugraj Jain (3 ).
(3.) I may read sec. 75 of the Act : - 75. Disputes which may be referred to arbitration - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, if any dispute touching the constitution, management, or the business of a co-operative society arises - (a) among members, past members and persons claiming through members and deceased members, or (b) between a member, part member or person claiming through a member, past member or deceased member and the society, its committee or any officer, agent or employee of the society, or (c) between the society or its committee and any past committee, any officer, agent or employee, or any past officer, past agent or past employee or the nominee, heirs or legal representatives of any deceased officer, deceased agent or deceased employee of the society, or (d) between the society and any other cooperative society. (e) between the society and the surety of a member, past member or a deceased member, or a person other than a member who has been granted a loan by the society or with whom the society has or had transaction under sec. 66, whether such a surety is or is not a member of a society. such dispute shall be referred to the Registrar for decision and no court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or other proceeding in respect of such dispute. (2) For the purposes of sub-sec. (1), the following shall be deemed to be disputes touching the constitution, management or the business of a co-operative society, namely - (a) a claim by the society for any debt or demand 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; (b) a claim by a surety against the principal debtor where the society has recovered from the surety any amount in respect of any debt or demand due to it from the principal debtor as a result of the default of the principal debtor, whether such debt or demand is admitted or not; (c) any dispute arising in connection with the election of any officer of the society. (3) If any question arises whether a dispute referred to the Registrar under this section is a dispute touching the constitution, management or the business of a co-operative society the decision thereon of the Registrar shall be final and shall not be called in question in any court. " The section opens with a non-obstente clause. This shows that the Legislature was keen to provide that ordinarily the co-operative societies should not be dragged in civil courts, if this could be avoided. The Act has provided a comparatively cheap and a speedy remedy in disputes concerning a Society. The words "touching the constitution, management or the business of a co-operative society" have to be given their full import. The word "business" has been used in different senses and in different contexts, but its ordinary dictionary meaning is 'activity, occupation, function'. It is also note-worthy that where a member is concerned in any dispute with the Society, the dispute must involve the character of the person as such a member and not otherwise than a member. This was the view of the Bombay High Court in Shyam Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. vs. Ramibai Bhagwansingh Advani (2), which has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in Deccan Merchants Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. M/s Dalichand Jugraj Jain (3 ). The Madras case cited by learned counsel for the appellant is also to the same effect. But here the question is as to which authority has to decide in the first instance the question whether the dispute referable to the Registrar is a dispute 'touching the constitution, management or the business of a cooperative society'. Sub-sec. (3) of sec. 75 to my mind makes it clear that whenever any dispute is referred to the Registrar, it is for the Registrar to decide whether the dispute touches inter alia business of the cooperative society and in that event the decision of the Registrar shall be final and shall not be called in question in any Court. Sec. 137 of the Act creates a bar to the jurisdiction of courts and I may read that section as well : - "137. Bar of jurisdiction of courts.- (1) Save as provided in this Act, no civil or revenue court shall have any jurisdiction in respect of, (a) the registration of a co-operative society or of an amendment of a bye law; (b) the removal of a committee; (c) any dispute required under sec. 75 to be referred to the Registrar; and (d) any matter concerning the winding up and the dissolution of a co-operative society. (2) While a co-operative society is being wound up, no suit or other legal proceedings relating to the business of such society shall be proceeded with or instituted against the liquidator as such or against the society or any member thereof, except by leave of the Registrar and subject to such terms as he may impose. (3) Save as provided in this Act, no order, decision or award made under this Act shall be questioned in any court on any ground whatsoever. " ;