Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1971 (10) TMI 116

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... -operative Society registered in Bombay under the Bombay Act. The Head Office of the appellant is in Bombay and it has a branch in Mangalore. As the objects of the appellant were not confined to one State, it was governed by Multi-Unit Co-operative Societies Act of 1942 (herinafter referred to as the Central Act). The appellant made a claim under section 54 of the Bombay Act in respect of a transaction which took place in Mangalore against the respondent who is a resident of Kasaragod, and was a member of the appellant society. Both Mangalore and Kasaragod were at the relevant time in Madras Presidency. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Bombay gave an award regarding that claim. The award was sought to be executed as a decree .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... shall, save as provided in sub-sections (2) and (3), be subject for all the purposes of registration, control and dissolution to the law relating to co-operative societies in force for the time being in the, State in which it is ac- tually registered. (2) Where any such co-operative society has established before the commencement of this Act or establishes after the commencement of this Act a branch or place of business in a State other than in which it is actually registered, it shall, within six months from the commencement of this Act or the date of establishment of the branch or place of business, as the case may be, furnish to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies of the State in which such branch or place of business is situated .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der the law in force in State 'B' relating to co-operative societies. Despite this deemed registration in State 'B' for, three purposes, namely, registration, control and dissolution,, the society shall be subject to the law relating to co-operative, societies in force in State 'A'. Sub-section (2) makes it obligatory on a co-operative society which establishes a branch or place of business in a State other than that in which it is actually registered to furnish within the prescribed time to the Registrar of the cooperative societies of the State in which such branch or place of business is situated, a copy of its by-laws and to submit such return and supply such information as the Registrar might require in respect .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the above argument that the word 'control' comprehends within itself .the adjudication of a claim made by a co- operative society against its members. The appellant society, as would appear from the resume of facts given above, established a branch in Mangalore ,and had dealings there with the respondent who was a resident of Kasaragod. As the objects of the appellant society were extended to the Presidency of Madras, it should, in view of subsection (1) of section 2 of the Central Act, be deemed to have .been registered under the law in force in the Presidency of Madras relating to co-operative societies. The law which was then in force, according to Mr. Naik, was the Madras Co- operative Societies Act, 1932 (hereinafter referred .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d that it also covers the adjudication of disputes between a co-operative society and its members. There is a clear distinction between jurisdiction to decide a dispute which is a judicial power and the exercise of control which is an administrative power and it would be wrong to treat the two as identical or equate one with the other. Reference has been made on behalf of the appellant to the case of Panchshila Industrial Co-operative Societies (Mult Unit) v. The Gurgaon Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Gurgaon([1971] (2) 2.S.C.C. 500). In that case, Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Rohtak had given an award in favour of the respondent bank which was a co-operative society governed by the provisions of Punjab Cooperative Societ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates