Monday 18 November 2013

CASELAWS REPORTED IN ALL INDIA COOPERATIVE LAW DIGEST - PART 3



PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE CASELAWS ARE NOT CORRECTLY PROOFREAD WITH ORIGINALS. SO KINDLY MAKE SURE THAT THEY MATCH WITH THE ORIGINALS

Appointment
-Administrator-Appointment of-Term coming to an end-Administrator removing a servant of the Society after expiry of his term/as Administrator not contemplated-Order of removal quashed, (Sec. 27, Punjab Co-operative societies Act, 1961).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 551
-Additional Registrar exercising of Registrar is competent to appointment an Administrator. (Sec. 26 (1-D), Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1981 P.L.J. 340
-Appointment of Administrator-There is no bar to appointment of a person senior in statutes to the person who is to effect the appointment. (Sec. 26 (1-D), Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1981 P.L.J. 340
-Appointment of Administrator-Registrar has to proceed under section (26) 1-D-No procedure has ben prescribed in Rule-Registrar before appointing Administrator has to find out two things : (i) Committee which was functioning has ceased to hold office, and (ii) No Committee, constituted in accordance with Act, Rules and Bye-law. (Sec. 26 (1-D), Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961).
1975 P.L.J. 481
-Appointment of Administrator-Order passed by Additional Registrar-Writ petition is maintainable if the order is in glaring infraction of Law, Sec. 26 (1-D), Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1981 P.L.R. 433
-Appointment of Administrator-Consultation with Circle Co-operative Union by the Registrar is only directory. (Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, Section 33).
A.I.R. 1972 Ker. 233 = 7 Co.op. L.J. 219 = 1971 Ker. L.J. 349
-Object-Validation of-Appointment of Administrator for more than six months earlier to Now. 29, 1973. Section 5, (Punjab Co-op. S. Act, 1961).
1974 P.L.J. 568
-Provisions apply to appointment of officers. (Mys. Co-op. Societies Act (52 of 1948), Section 126 and 21 (2) (a)).
(1968) 2 Mys. L.J. 528
-The appointment of the District Magistrate cannot be held to be beyond the scope of Section 3 (2)). Uttar Pradesh Co-op. Societies Act, (11 of 1966), Section 3 (2)).
1975 All. W.C. 394
-District Magistrate appointed as Registrar can entertain reference for action under S. 70. (Uttar Pradesh Co-op. Societies Act (11 of 1966) S. 3 (1) & (2)).
1975 All. W.C. 394
-Power to appoint secretary Joint Registrar has no such power. (Kar. Co-op. Societies Act, 1959, Section 128-A).
1979 Lab. I.C. 467 (Kant)
-The proviso deals with the period of inter gnum between the coming into force of the Removal of Difficulties Order and the making of the appointment by the Society. (Uttar Pradesh Co-op. Societies Act (11 of 1966), S.131 (10) (2) (as added by Removal of Difficulties Order, 1968 and S. 120 (1)).
1969 All. L.J. 789
-Power of appointment of Secretary under Section 31 is subject to Section 120. (Uttar Pradesh Co-op. Societies Act (11 of 1966), S. 31, 120).
1969 All. L.J. 789
-Appointment as Arbitrator-Successor has no jurisdiction. (Uttar Pradesh Co-op. Societies Act (11 of 1966), Section 71).
I.L.R. (1976) 2 Allahabad 352
-In order to remove servant on ground of shrinkage of work the previous approval of Registrar not necessary. (Bihar & Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1935, Section 11).
A.I.R. 1955 Patna 223
-Validity of appointment of liquidator by virtue of office. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, S. 42 (1)).
 A.I.R. 1955 Nag. 262 = ILR (1956) Nag. 51 = 1955 Nag. L.J. 649
 -Where the notification issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies appointing a Special Officer is nullity, Section 26-A being not applicable to the case, the Managing Committee of the Society continues and, accordingly, the Chairman has locus standi to filed the writ petition without the other members joining him. (West Bengal Co-op. Soc. Act, 1973 S. 26-A).
A.I.R. 1981 Calcutta 378
-Under clause (a) of Section 26-A, the date of dissolution has been fixed to be the date following the day on which the said period of fifteen months expires. The Registrar shall appoint a Special Officer for managing the society and for holding the election within a period not exceeding one year from the date of such dissolution. There may be caused where the said period of one year had expired before the enactment of Section 26-A and in such cases, the section will not be applicable. (West Bengal Co-op. Societies Act. 1973, Section 26-A).
A.I.R. 1981 Calcutta 378
-Managing Director-Appointment of -Nomination prior to appointment is essential. (Sec. 26 (2) (a), Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961).
1976 P.L.R. 560
-Scope-Managing Director-Appointment of-Government can appoint at any time. (Sec. 26, Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961).
1969 P.L.R. 560
-Only by virtue of the power of appointment being vested in the Board, the Board cannot usurp the power vested in the Registrar under Section 116-A and constitute a service and then exercise the power of making appointments to sub service. (Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, Section 115).
I.L.R. (1973) Andhra Pradesh 292
-Second proviso-The first proviso to Section relates to appointment and the second proviso provides for nomination. On a reading of these provision and the bye-laws in a harmonious way it seems that it is not the intention of the second proviso that the power of nomination should be limited only to members. (Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act (53 of 1961), Section 27 (1), Second Proviso).
1974 Co-op. L.R. 220 = (1974) 1 Mad. L.J. 14 = 87 Mad. L.W. 5
-Appointment made in a meeting presided over by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies-Registrar having acquiesced in the appointment and having allowed the incumbent to work for thirteen years, it was not open to him to set aside the appointment of the incumbent. (Orissa Co-operative Societies Rules, 1953, Rule 29 (d) and 34).
A.I.R. 1977 Supreme Court 112 = (1977) 13 Co-op. L.J. 32 = 34 Fac. L.R. 37
-The appointment of a Deputy Registrar under Section 51 (2) to act as an arbitrator in respect of a certain claim against a Society cannot be objected to be against the rules of natural justice. (Madras Co-operative Societies Act 96 of 1932, Section 51 (2)).
(1957) 2 Andh. W.R. 226 = (1957) Andh. L.T. 607
-Though a committee appointed under sub-section (1) has no vested right to continue and is normally amenable to the Registrar’s order of appointment and re-appointment, if the situation has reached a stage as contemplated by sub-section (3), it does get a right under the statute to continue until the elected body takes over from it. In the instant case though the situation contemplated by sub-section (3) had been reached, the Registrar by the impugned order replaced the committee by an administrator. Order must, therefore, be struck down. (Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act (24 of 1961), Section 78 (1), (2), (3) and (4)).
A.I.R. 1979 Bombay 222 = 1979 Mah. L.J. 267
-Applicable only in the case of officer whose appointments disqualified for appointment to being with. (Sec. 29, Punjab Co-op. Soc. Act, 1961).
1973 P.L.J. 728
-The word ‘when’ in Rule 28 refers to a time after the election has taken place, because firstly the Registrar’s power to appoint is limited to one-half of the number of Directors elected, and secondly his decision is to be guided by consideration of representation of appropriate interests, which consideration can arise only after the Registrar sees what types of interest succeeded in getting elected. (Bengal Co-operative Societies Rules, 1942, Rules 28, 32).
(65) 1969 Cal. W.N. 203
-Power of dismissal is incident to that of appointment. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Section 42 (2) (c) and 3).
A.I.R. 1960 Madhya Pradesh 273
-The Registrar cannot be deemed to be the head of the Co-operative Society and he should not be deemed to have power to interfere in the matters of appointments and dismissals of its employees. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Section 35).
A.I.R. 1956 Allahabad 43 = (1956) 1 Lab. L.J. 242
-The word ‘when’ in Rule 20 refers to a time after the election has taken place, because firstly the Registrar’s power to appoint is limited to one ‘half’ of the number of Directors elected, and secondly his decision is to be guided by considerations of representation of appropriate interests, which consideration can arise only after the Registrar sees what types of interest succeeded in getting elected. It cannot be said that in appointing additional directors the Registrar would exceed his power in making appointments of Additional directors in the Managing Committee of the Society under Rule 32, although he does so at a very late stage. (Bengal Co-operative Societies Rules, 1942, Rule 28, 32).
(1965) 69 Cal. W.N. 203
-Under a Bye-law of the particular Society the President had the power to make appointments did not mean he could do so ignoring the statutory requirement. (Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, Section 129 and Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960, Rule 17-B and 17(2).
(1980) 1 Lab. L.J. 95 = (1979) 2 Kant. L.J. 314 = 1980 Lab. I.C. 430
-Appointment would remain valid till it is set aside. (Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act (11 of 1966) Section 120 (1) and (2)).
1969 A.L.J. 789
-Appointment of the Committee under orders of the Joint Registrar was not a Committee appointed by the Joint Registrar but was a Committee appointed by persons authorized by the Joint Registrar to nominate persons and, therefore, the Committee which was appointed was not a Committee appointed in accordance with sub-clause (1) of Section 53 and, therefore, has no lawful authority to look after the affairs of the Society. Any sub-committee appointed by it could not have any lawful authority and, therefore, the orders of termination passed against the employee of a Society by such sub-committee were illegal. (M.P. Co-operative Societies Act (17 of 1961) Section 53 (1).
A.I.R. 1984 Madhya Pradesh 40 = 1983 MPLJ 762 = 1984 Jab LJ 71
-Appointment-Approval not accorded-Appointment are liable to be terminated. (A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, Section 114 A).
1981 (1) A.L.T.13
-Where the bye-laws make provision for appointment for such period as the Registrar may consider necessary, the appointment of a non-official member as the President and director for a period of one year is valid and he cannot take advantage of Section 27 (3) (b) and claim that the appointment is for three years. (Mad. Co-op. Societies Act (53 of 1961), Sec. 27 (1), Second Proviso and 27 (3) (b).
(1968) 2 M.L.J. 439
-Appointment of Managing Director for each apex society under Section 73-J and Rule 85-NA-Does not violate fundamental right to form association. (Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act (53 of 1961), Section 73-J (Introduced by Act 32 of 1970 and Rules under the Act, Rule 85-NA.)
A.I.R 1979 Mad. 341 = I.L.R. (1979) 2 Mad. 242 = (1979) 2 Mad. L.J. 253
-Appointment of Managing Director-Requirement-There has to be nomination in addition to members already nominated on the committee-Held that appointment of Managing Director could not made out of nominated members and that another member has to be nominated (Sec. 26. Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961).
1976 P.L.J. 397
-Government can appoint Managing Director at any time-Power is not limited to initial stage only i.e. when election to Committee has taken place and thereafter. (Sec. 26, Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961).
1976 P.L.J. 397
-The Act contemplates the appointment of a nominee for a particular dispute. There is no limit on the power of the nominee to decide the dispute within a particular time. Nor does it say that afer the year of the office is over, he would cease to be a nominee of the Registrar. (Maharashtra Co-op. Societies Act (24 of 1961) Section 91).
A.I.R. 1969 Bom. 54 = 1968 Mah. L.J. 631 = I.L.R. 1968 Bom. 768 = 70 Bom. L.R. 404
-The order of the apportionment of costs should not be made unless the enquiry under Section 88 of the Act is complete. (Maharashtra Co-op. Societies Act (24 of 1961), Section 85).
(1977) 3 U.C.R. (Bombay) 78

Arbitration
-Arbitration-Liquidator of Society cannot act as-He cannot be a Judge in his own cause. (Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, Sections 55, 56, 59 and 68).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 550
-Persons appointed to decide dispute are ‘arbitrators’. Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Rules, 1936, Rules 115 to 138).
A.I.R. 1963 Allahabad 113
-Section 54 prescribes one arbitration proceeding only. (Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925, Sections 54 and 71- (Bombay Co-operative Rules, 1927, Rule 35).
A.I.R. 1978 N.O.C. 77 (Delhi) = I.L.R. (1977) 2 Delhi 632
-All arbitrators are expected to join in the deliberation and pronounce the award whether unanimously or by majority, but proceedings by only same of the arbitrators are not contemplated, except, where others may refuse to act. (Rajasthan Co-op. Societies Act (4 of 1953), S 61 and 62.
I.L.R. (1958) 8 Raj. 1063 = 1959 Raj. L.W. 261
-Dispute under the Co-operative Societies Act can be decided i arbitration by the Registrar himself or by an arbitrator appointed by him- (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Section 43 and Rules 26 and 27)
1963 M.P.L.J. (Notes) 155
-Arbitration proceedings-Ensure elaborate and fair trial. (Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. 1969, Section 69).
I.L.R. (1980) 2 Kerala 9
-Persons appointed to decide the disputes are to act as arbitrators. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Section 43 & U.P. Co-operative Societies Rules, 1936, Rules, 115 to 138).
A.I.R. 1963 Allahabad 113 = 1962 All W.R. (H.C.) 904 = 1962 All. L.J. 876
-There is no indication anywhere in the Act or the Rules framed thereunder that the Registrar has got the power to implead legal representatives in arbitration proceedings. (Kerala Co-op. Societies Act, 1969, S. 70).
1976 Ker. L.T. 18
-Dismissal of arbitration case as not maintainable-Order could not be validated by subsequent order of Registrar or Government. (Gujarat Co-op. Societies Act (10 of 1962), Section 166).
A.I.R. 1976 Gujarat 105 = 16 Guj. L.R. 1058
-The words ‘Arbitration’ and ‘Award’ have been used to signify a special Tribunal. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Sec. 43).
A.I.R. 1938 Calcutta 327
-Order of Registrar condoning delay in referring a dispute to arbitration is not appealable. (Gujarat Co-op. Societies Act (10 of 1962), S. 97 (3)).
(1978) 19 Guj. L.R. 92
-The dispute relating to expulsion of a member could not be referred to the Registrar under Section 96 for arbitration. (Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act (10 of 1962), Sections 36, 96 and 153).
(1978) 19 Guj. L.R. 92
-Arbitration proceedings-Minor not represented. Award against minor held to be void- Civil Procedure Code (5 of 1908), Order 32 Rule 3. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961).
1976 P.L.J. 537
-Interpretation of Rule 56-Arbitration claim-Legal Representatives of ex-President-Starting point of limitation. (Tamil Nadu  Co-op. Societies Rules, 1963, Rule 56 (2) proviso).
A.I.R. 1977 Madras 70
-Society represented by its directors who ceased to be directors in arbitration proceedings-They cannot continue to represent the Society as members of the Society. (Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, 117).
(1980) 2 Kant. L.J. 101
-Arbitration proceedings-New office-bearers substituted-Competent to file appeal against the award. (Karnataka Co-op. Societies Act, 1959, 117).
(1980) 2 Kant L.J. 101
-Impleading of person in arbitration proceedings before Registrar, Co-operative Societies-An application for such a request under the sub-rule has to be made by the Society only and not by any other party. (Mysore Co-operative Societies Act 952 of 1948), 74 (4).
(1970) 1 Mys. L.J. 80
-Where an allotment by the Society was questioned and the matter was decided by arbitration, the dispute related to the business of the society. (Mysore Co-operative Societies Act (52 of 1948), Sec. 70).
(1969) 1 Mys. L.J. 196 = (1969) 17 Law. Rep. 650 = (1969) 5 Co-op. L.J. 231
-Arbitration proceedings-Surety not a necessary party. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1982 All India Land  Laws Reporter 22
-Arbitration proceedings-Intimation of date, time and place of hearing the dispute to the parties is an essential preliminary to the Arbitrator assuming jurisdiction to decide the dispute-Failure of Arbitrator to perform this duty-Action not only to be regarded as procedurally ultra vires but also without Jurisdiction (Punjab Co-operative Societies Act (25 of 1961), Section 54, 55, 56 and 63. (Rule 53 of Punjab Co-operative Societies Rules, 1963):
1978 PLJ 251
-Provisions of Section 33, Arbitration Act are not inconsistent with U.P, Co-operative Societies Rules, (Uttar Pradesh Co-op. Societies Rules, 1968), Rules 115).
A.I.R. 1977 Allahabad 158
-Bar of jurisdiction of civil or revenue Courts in respect of any dispute arising under the Act-Such interpretation implies the ouster of the application of the provisions of the Arbitration Act. (Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961, Sections 82 (1) and 82 (2).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 138
-Section 16 of Arbitration Act will apply to awards in a statutory reference, (Bengal Co-operative Societies Rules, 1942, Rule 127 (1).
A.I.R. 1968 Calcutta 146
-Arbitration Act, 1940 Section 33 and 46-Provision of section 33 of the Arbitration Act inconsistent and inapplicable to statutory arbitration under the Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 138
-Arbitrator Act, 1940, Section 33-Applicability of the provision of the Arbitration Act to arbitration under the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961-Provision of Arbitration Act not applicable. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 138
-The provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, exclude the applicability of Section 33 of the Arbitration Act to a statutory Award under Section 56 of the former Act. (Punjab Co-operative Societies Act (25 of 1961), Sections 55, 56 and 82.
A.I.R. 1983 Punjab and Haryana 19 = 1983 (19) Co-op. L.J. 227 = 1983 P.L.R. 161 = 1982 P.L.J. 408
-Arbitration Act not applicable to arbitration under the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. (Sec. 33, Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 138
-When her provision of Societies Act expressly or by necessary implication exclude the applicability of Section 33 Arbitration Act to statutory Award under Section-56-Legislature imposed triple bar in pre-emptory term in excluding jurisdiction of Civil Court-Inevitable ousts application of Section 33 Arbitration Act-Patent inconsistencies between provisions of Punjab Co-operative Societies  Act and Arbitration Act millitate strongly  in favour of implied exclusion of provisions of one statute from the other-The Provisions of Punjab Co-operative Societies Act and the Rules framed thereunder provide in detail for the both the reference of dispute and rendering of statutory Award-Provisions of Arbitration Act not applicable in view of Section 46 of Arbitration Act-Provisions of Section 33  Arbitration Act inconsistent and inapplicable to statutory Award under Punjab Co-operative Societies Act-Civil Revision No. 202 of 1962 decided on August 16, 1963 Jullundur Central Co-operative Bank Limited V. Jawala Dass and others. Over-ruled Arbitration Act (10 of 1940) Section 33 and 46 (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 138
-When parties had contracted to be bound by decision of arbitrator on the whole and not in part of matters referred, considering the peculiar nature of claim, successive awards may be valid. (Bengal Co-operative Societies Act (21 of 1940), Section 87).
A.I.R. 1968 Calcutta 146
-A dispute between a member of the Managing Committee of a Co-operative Bank who is also a director of the Bank and the Bank itself falls within the scope of Rule 18 and such a dispute can be referred to arbitration by the Registrar as provided therein. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Section 43(2) & Rules under Section 43 framed by Chief Commissioner of Ajmer, Rule, 18).
1960 Raj. L.W. 561 = I.L.R. (1960) 10 Raj. 1070
-The arbitrator is a quasi-judicial authority. (Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, Section 70).
1979 Ker. L.T. 629
-The dispute between the Society and the non-member Surety cannot be referred to the Registrar under Section 70 cannot be decided by an Arbitrator under Section 71. (Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, Sections 70, 71).
I.L.R. (1973) Kant 684
-The appointment of a Deputy Registrar under Section 51 (2) to act as an arbitrator in respect of a certain claim against a Society cannot be objected to be against the rules of natural justice. (Madras Co-operative Societies Act (6 of 1932), Section 51 (2)).
(1957) 2 Andh. W.R. 226 = (1957) Andh. L.T. 607
-Arbitrators have the power to strike out names of directors representing the Society. (Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, Section 17 (3) (c)).
(1980) 2 Kant. L.J. 101
-Arbitrator-Liquidator of Society cannot act as-He cannot be judge in his own cause. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 550
-Arbitrator has no jurisdiction to set aside an ex parte award passed under. (Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, Sec. 70 (3)).
1974 Ker. L.T. 47 = 1974 Co-op. L.R. 217 = 1973 Ker. L.J. 770 = (1974) 10 Co-op. L.J. 84
-An arbitrator under the Co-operative Societies Act is a creature of that Act and rules framed thereunder. The powers of the arbitrator in giving a decision or award are circumscribed by several conditions. He has to fix the date and place of hearing the dispute, to afford the parties an opportunity of hearing. He has then to record the evidence adduced by the parties. The arbitrator can give his decision or award only upon a consideration of the evidence recorded, or produced (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Sec. 43 & Rules under, Rules, 115, 116, 117, 118, 122 and 123).
A.I.R. 1968 Allahabad 22 = 1967 All. L.J. 454
-An arbitrator is not the repository of the judicial function of the State. He cannot be likened to a Court or a Judge. Chapter XIV of the rules provides the arbitrator many of trappings of a Court. That does not give him the status of a Court. That has been done to prevent him Courts of general jurisdiction have been constituted for administering justice in the State. In respect of the legality of their acts, they have been placed on the same level as an ordinary citizen. The Co-operative Societies Act and the rules have constituted the arbitrator for a limited purpose, and have conferred well-defined powers. He has no general jurisdiction. No inherent powers which properly belong to Courts can be recognized in his case. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Sec. 43 & Rules under, Ch. XIV, Rules 115, to 118, 122, 123 and 127).
A.I.R. 1968 Allahabad 22 = 1968 All. L.J. 454

Arbitratory Power
-Section 54 does not vest the State Government with arbitrary power uncontrolled or unguided by any statement of principles or conditions, and Section 121 does not involve unconstitutional delegation to the Executive Government of essential legislative functions. (Mysore Co-operative Societies Act (52 of 1948), Sec. 54 and 121).
A.I.R. 1971 Mysore 37 = (1970) 1 Mys. L.J. 328 = (1970) 6 Co-op. L.J. 169
-Rule 27 (e) does not confer arbitrary power on Registrar. (Madras Co-operative Societies Act (6 of 1932), Sec. 65).
A.I.R. 1953 Madras 542 = (1952) 2 Mad. L.J. 868 = 66 Mad. L.W. 42
-The power conferred on the State Government under Section 73-A to add to the list of designated officers is not maked arbitrary power given to the State Government. The Legislature has clearly indicated the officers who could be designated as ‘designated officers’. The Legislature has also indicated that officers, who are appointed or nominated by the State Government or by the Registrar, will not be notified as designated officers. (Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (17 of 1961), Sec. 73-A).
A.I.R. 1984 Bom. 81 = 1983 Mad. L.J. 719 = 1984 (20) Co-op. L.J. 144
-Rule 39 does not confer unfettered arbitrary power on Registrar. (Bihar and Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1935, Preamble-Bihar Co-operative Societies Rules, 1959, Rule 39).
A.I.R. 1968 Patna 211

Arising of Liability
-A member’s liability to make good the debts of a Society does not arise till liquidation. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Sec. 23).
A.I.R. 1955 Nagpur 262 = I.L.R. (1956) Nag. 51 = 1955 Nag. L.J. 649

Arrest
-Foundation of power to recover amount under Section 42 (4-A) wanting-Proceedings culminating in arrest of member are illegal. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Section 42 (4-A) (as inserted by U.P. Act 3 of 1919).
A.I.R. 1959 Allahabad 733

Area of Operation
-Haryana State Central Co-op. Bank staff Service (Common Rules, 1975)-Validity-Rules held are not ultra vires as they do not inferring upon statutory rights of primary Societies-No conflict between area of operation of Section 84-A and 23. (Sec. 23, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
A.I.R. 1976 Punj. 283
-The common good fund could be utilized within the area of operation of the bank for any charitable purpose as defined in Section 2 of the Act, 1890 (Andhra Pradesh Co-op. Societies Act, 1964, S. 12, 45).
I.L.R. (1977) Andhra Pradesh 246

Arrears
-Civil suit for salary arrears is not maintainable. (Madras Co-op. Societies Act (6 of 1932 Sec. 51).
1970 Ker. L.J. 757
-A claim by the past officer of the Society for arrears of salary comes within the clause ‘touching the business of the society’. (Tamil Nadu Co-op. Societies Act (53 of 1961, S. 73 (1)).
(1972) 2 Mad. L.J. 134 = (1972) 85 Mad. L.W. 511
-Section 59(1) (b) of the Bombay Co-op. Societies Act enables execution of an order under Section 51 (1) in the manner laid down for the recovery of arrears of land revenue. (Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925, Sec. 59 (1)(a)).
I.L.R. (1959) Mys. 242
-The Collector who had power to execute the award under Section 59 (10)(b) of Bombay Act (VII of 1925), according to the law and under the rules in force for the recovery of arrears of land revenue, was at perfect liberty, after exhausting the mortgaged properties, to recover the balance due from the defendant as though he was recovering arrears of land revenue. (Bombay Co-op. Societies Act, 1925, Sec. 59 (1)(b)).
A.I.R. 1951 Bombay 267 = 52  Bom. L.R. 834
-Section 35 does not empower Assistant Registrar with powers of Registrar (Co-op. Societies Act, 1912, Sec. 35).
1970 All L.J. 910
-Rule 137 only permits the amount under an award to be realized as an arrear of land revenue against a Society or person who is property a party to the award. (Co-op. Societies Act, 1912, Section 43 & Rules mad under, Rule 137).
A.I.R. 1956 All. 112 = 1956 All. W.R. (H.C.) 706 = 1956 All. L.J. 151
-The Assistant Registrar under Rule 174 does not himself become the Registrar. (Co-op, Societies Act, 1912, Sec. 43 (2) (1) (As amended by U.P. Amendment Act X of 1957), Rules 133-A and 174)).
A.I.R. 1967 Allahabad 305

Ascertainment of Liability
-An order for contribution passed by the Liquidator before ascertaining the assets of the Society as required by Rule 43 of the Rules framed under the Co-op Societies Act, is ultra vires. (Co-op. Societies Act, 1912, Sec. 43 & Rule 43).
A.I.R. 1951 Nagpur 210 = 1951 N.L.J. 172

Association
-Appointment of Managing Director for each apex society under Sec. 73-J and Rule 85-NA-Does not violate fundamental right to form association. (Tamil Nadu Co-op. Societies Act (53 of 1961), Sec. 73-J (Introduced by Act 32 of 1970 and Rules under the Act, Rule 85-NA).
A.I.R. 1979 Mad. 341 = I.L.R. (1972) 2 Mad. 242 = (1979) 2 Mad. L.J. 253

Assistance
-Application for permission to engage counsel-Registrar to apply his judicial mind and to exercise his judicial discretion in regard to the prayer for assistance of a counsel. (Kerala Co-op. Societies Rules, 1969, Rule 67 (8)).
A.I.R. 1978 N.O.C. 98 = (1977) 13 Co.op. L.J. 181 = 1978 Ker. L.T.4

Asset
-No bank had exclusive right over any area and area as such does not constitute asset of bank. (Andhra Pradesh Co-op. Societies Act, 1964, S. 15).
(1967) 1 Andh. W.R. 244
-The amounts due by a debtor to the society can be treated as assets of the society and not as contribution. These amounts are not recoverable under Sub-section (4A) of Section 42 as arrears of land revenue. These amounts can only be recovered by following the procedures laid down by Clause (a) of sub-section (5) of Section 42. (Co-op. Societies Act, 1921, S. 42 (5) (a)).
A.I.R. 1954 Allahabad 646 = 1954 All. L.J. 305
-Merely stating the manner in which the assets liabilities of the Societies in question were to be dealt with held violated sub-rule (2) of Rule 9 and was therefore ineffective. (Andhra Pradesh Co-op. Societies Rules, 1964, Rule 9).
(1972) 8 Co-op. L.J. 208 = (1972) 2 An. L.T. 61 = ILR (1972) Andh. Pra. 1140

Auction
-Appeal against order confirming auction sale passed by Assistant Registrar is maintainable. (Kar. Co-op. Societies Act, 1959, S. 101 (2).
(1978) 2 Kant L.J. 13
-Order confirming auction sale passed by Assistant Registrar-Order was under Section 101(2) and Deputy Registrar is the immediate superior officer to Assistant Registrar. (Karnataka Co-op. Societies Act, 1959, S. 106 (1) (i) and 92) (b) (as amended by Amendment Act 40 of 1964) and 101 (2)).
(1978) 14 Co-op. L.J. 261 = (1978) 2 Kant. L.J. 13
-Sale of property by auction-Sale certificate of Assistant Registrar amounts to a decree of Civil Court. (Karnataka Co-op. Societies Act, 1959, Section 101).
I.L.R. (1975) Kant 1011 = (1975) 2 Kant. L.J. 54
-Property of Society put to auction by Administrator acting in, executing capacity-Similarly Registrar while controlling action of Administrator also acts in executive capacity-Held that notice or hearing before cancellation of bid is not necessary-Section 27(3), does not require the Registrar to pass a speaking order. (Sec. 27 (3), Punjab Co-op, Societies Act, 1961),
1974 PLJ 113

Attachment
-Member of Co-op. Housing Society-His rights were transferable and heritable-Liable to attachment in execution of decree against member, Sec. Civil P.C. (1908), Section 60. (Gujarat Co-op. Societies Act (10 of 1962), S. 30 and 32).
A.I.R. 1977 Gujarat 131
-Member allotted a flat as tenant-It cannot be attached and sold in execution of. (Maharashtra Co-op. Societies Act (24 of 1961), Sec. 29(2).
A.I.R. 1974 Bombay 87 = (1973) 2 Co-op. L.J. 202 = 75 Bom. L.R. 649 = I.L.R. (1975) Bombay 1122
-Flat can be attached and sold in execution of a decree against the allottee. (Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act (24 of 1961), Sec. 29).
A.I.R. 1975 Supreme Court 1470
-The right or interest of a member of a co-op Society ( in the house) cannot be attached and sold in execution of a decree against the member. (Madras Co-op. Societies Act ( 6 of 1932), Sec. 23 and Bye-law 39 (vi).
(1965) 1 Andh. W.R. 229
-Order of attachment must be a speaking order. (J and K Co-op. Societies Act (28 of 1960), Sec. 99, 103).
1973 J & K.I.R. 717 = 1973 Kash. L.J. 337
-Co-op. Society has locus standi to object to attachment of shares of members. (Co-op. Societies Act, 1912, Section 21).
A.I.R. 1979 Lahore 305
-Section 23 prohibits attachment and sale of the right and interest of a member of a Co-op. Society. Therefore, merely because a right to purchase was attachable and saleable under Section 60 of the Civil Procedure Code, the right of a member of a Co-op. Societies could not be attached and sold. (Andhra Pradesh Co-op. Societies Act (6 of 1932), Sec. 23).
(1965) 1 Andh. W.R. 229
-Under Section 23 and bye-law 39, members’ right or interest in a Co-op. Society cannot be attached or sold in execution of a decree. (Andhra Pradesh Co-op. Societies Act (6 of 1932), Section 23 and Bye-law 29).
(1965) 1 Andh. W.R. 229
-Attachment of one’s movable or immovable property for the aggregate sum of two awards is bad. (Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, Section 76).
A.I.R. 1972 Kerala 93 = 1971 Ker. L.J. 570

Auction Purchase
-Auction of Property by administration-Acts in his executing capacity-Registrar while exercising his control over auction also acts in his executive capacity-It is not necessary to give notice or hearing to parties before cancellation or acceptance of bid” speaking order” need not be passed. (Sec. 27 (3), Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1974 Co-op. L.J. 244
-Application for delivery of possession of property by auction-purchaser-Article 134 of Limitation Act applies. (Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act (53 of 1961), Section 93).
(1980) 1 Mad. L.J. 259 = (1980) 93 Mad. L.W. 91
-Confirmation of sale-No necessary for auction purchaser for acquiring prior membership of Co-operative Society. (Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act (24 of 1961), Section 105).
(19780) 80 Bom. L.R. 585

Authorization
-Authorization by Registrar is not binding on the Magistrate and he has to go behind authorization and decide whether applicant is competent under the section to file such application. (Travancore-Cochin Co-operative Societies Act (10 of 1952), Section 49 (5)).
1963 Ker L.J. 585

Authority
-The language of the Rule is not explicit but the intention of the rule-making authority is clearly decipherable as to what is to happen on expiry of the period of two months or on the expiry of such further period as the Registrar may have allowed. It is this that the authority in the nominee or the committee of three arbitrators comes to an end. At the expiry of two months or such further extended time, the nominee or the Committee of three arbitrators necessarily or inevitably loses jurisdiction to deal with the dispute. The nominee no longer remains competent to give his decision and the Committee or three arbitrators similarly has no authority to make an award. On the expiry of the period the automatic revocation of the authority is implied. The dispute reverts back to the Registrar. The Registrar may then decide the dispute himself or refer again for decision to his nominee. ‘Refer again for decision to his nominee’ has to be given a full meaning so as to advance the purpose of the Act. It is the second reference for the purpose of a decision of the dispute, ‘again’ indicates that it could be to the previous nominee and not necessarily to a fresh nominee. The Registrar does not have any time limit imposed on him for deciding the dispute himself. If the dispute is initially referred to the nominee, then there is a time limit imposed but not when the dispute is referred again to the nominee for his decision. The rules do not provide for any time limit for deciding the dispute by the nominee on the second reference. The wisdom is that at that stage the Registrar would think again about the capacity of his nominee and then entrust the dispute for settlement. (Delhi Co-operative Societies Rules, 1950, Rule 35).
A.I.R. 1982 Delhi 335 = 1982 (22) D.L.T. 87

Audit
-The responsibility for audit of the accounts of the Society rest with the Registrar who is required to have the accounts of every Society audited at least once in a year. Sub-section (6) of Section 8 provides that on an application by a Society or otherwise, when it appears necessary or expedient to the Registrar, he can have account of any Society ‘re-audited’. However, the section does not prescribe the period within which the audit or re-audit must be completed or the manner and  period within which the auditor’s report have to be submitted. (Manipur Co-operative Societies Act, 1970, Sections 73, 75, 76 and 81).
A.I.R. 1985 N.O.C. 16 (Gauhati)
-Even in the absence of the rules, the auditor has jurisdiction to audit and the audit report cannot be challenged as being void because of absence of the rules. (Bihar and Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1935, Section 33).
1960 B.L.J.R. 49
-Audit notes-There is no provision of law under which their contents could be presumed to be correct. (Co-op. Societies Act, 1912, Section 17).
A.I.R. 1970 Punjab 203 = 1969 Cur. L.J. 581 = 72 Pun. L.R. 60
-In order to attract Section 49(1), it is necessary that either an audit or an inquiry or an inspection should disclose that persons in management have misappropriate the funds. (Madras Co-operative Societies Act (6 of 1932), Section 49 (1)).
I.L.R (1960) 2 Andh. Pra. 809 = 1960 Andh. L.T. 102 = (1960) 1 Andh. W.R. 57
-The powers of the General Body under Section 72 are not subjected to the Auditor’s objections or the Registrar’s interference unwarranted by law. (Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act (24 of 1961), Section 72, 64, 65 and 88).
I.L.R. (1975) Bombay 809 = (1974) 76 Bom. L.R. 179 = 1975 Co. op. L.R. 100 = 1974 Mah. L.J. 550

Award
-Award under-Case remanded when principles of natural justice not followed while passing award. 9 Sec. 63, (Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1980 All India Land Laws Reporter 36
-Award-Execution of by Registrar-Can be done only under clause (b)-Registrar does not come into picture in execution of award under clause (a) or Clause (c) therefore Registrar cannot discriminate between different persons by choosing one or the other mode of execution of award -Constitution of India, Art. 14. (Sec. 63, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1974 P.L.J. 418
-Award-Future interest-Arbitrator is competent to award furture interest at the rate not exceeding 6 per cent. (Sec. 56, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1975 P.L.R. 157
-Award by arbitrator must be supported by reasons and the manner in which he arrived at the conclusion as Arbitrator acts as a quasi-judicial tribunal. (Sec. 56, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961)
1975 P.L.R. 157
-Award-Quashing-of-High Court in writ proceedings cannot set aside part of Award and uphold the rest-Dis-proportionate costs in award-sufficient ground for quashing whole of Award Punjab Co-operative Societies, Rules, 1953, Rule 56. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1976 P.L.J. 41
-The infirmity of commission of reasons from Award-Would not render Award as non-est and a nullity. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961.
1979 All India Land Laws Reporter 30
-Award not speaking-Petitioner going in Appeal and revision-Liability admitted-Detailed reasons given by revisional authority in the judgment-Award stood merged in final decision of revisional authority-Cannot be quashed as  non-speaking. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961)
1982 P.L.J. 221
-Award given by Registrar or Arbitrator-Can be executed as a decree of a Civil Court-Validity of award-Determination of-Award not on a higher footing than a decree-Civil Court is competent to determine whether award is valid or not. (Sec. 63 Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1975 P.L.J. 162
-Essential requisite for Award to be deemed a decree-Award must conform to the provisions of statute-Arbitrator committing some error of Law while Award-Executing Court can go behind Award. Award which does not conform with the provisions of a statute cannot be said to be duly made and would not be executing as a decree in Civil Court-C.P.C. (5 of 1908) (Sec. 63, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1979 P.L.J. 66
-Award in printed form and point in controversy not discussed therein-Award held to be illegal-Arbitrator must set out (i) items of dispute, (ii) decision thereon and (iii) reasons for decision-Award which does not state the points of different referred to Arbitrator for decision and the manner in which Arbitrator arrived at the conclusion-Invalid. (Rule 79, Punjab Co-operative Societies Rule, 1963).
1975 P.L.J. 507
-Power of arbitrator to award interest. Held, that the arbitrator can award interest at the agreed rate between the parties up to the date of award and for the period thereafter upto the date of realization interest can be awarded at the rate not exceeding 6 per cent per annum as provided in S. 34 of the Civil Procedure Code. (Sec. 56, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1975 P.L.R. 157
-Award-Executing Court-Power to go behind the Award-Failure to serve notice under-Effect. If no notice was served the award will not be capable of execution, but if a notice was served, the award will be executable (Sec. 50, Punjab Cop-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1966 P.L.R. 198
-Award Recording of the prescribed form-It is Directory and not mandatory. (Rule 79, Punjab Co-operative Societies Rule, 1963).
1976 P.L.J. 258
-Award itself a decree and therefore, executable-Not necessary to have award made a rule of Court. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1979 All India Land Laws Reporter 424
-Award-Cryptic award-Nullity-Arbitrator must set up. (1) items of dispute (2) decision thereon, (3) reasons for those decisions-Arbitrator acts as a quasi-judicial-Decision must contain particulars and grounds or reasons on which it is based-Should be speaking award-Difference between award given under Punjab Co-operative Societies Act and Arbitration Act stated. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961)
1977 P.L.J. 400
-Award can be executed by Registrar-Third party purchaser can ask for possession either by filing suit for possession or by taking recourse to Rule 38-A. (Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960, Rule 38-A).
(1977) 1 Kant. L.J. 166
-Award against legal representatives of a debtor-Debtor working cashier of the Co-operative Society. Award is beyond the scope of the Act and has no legal validity so far as the legal representatives are concerned. (Sec. 22 Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 418
-Award of an Arbitrator should disclose process of reasoning-Award not speaking-Award set aside. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 242
-Employee of indebted Society-Award against-Cannot be given by Arbitrator. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1976 S.L.W.R. 585 (DB)
-Award-Revision against-Remedy of revision has been taken away only in these cases where appeal lies to the Government or the Registrar. (Sec. 69, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1972 P.L.J. 46
-Primary Society indebted to Apex Society-Claim by Apex Society against Salesman of indebted Society-Award by Arbitrator in favour of Apex Society against Salesman of indebted Society-Award of Arbitrator quashed on the ground that award cannot be made against employee of indebted Society. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-operative Society Act, 1961).
1976 P.L.J. 522
-Award made without notice-Award not speaking one-Process of reasoning not given-Liable to be quashed. (Sec. 55, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1980 All India Land Laws Reporter 36
-Award by arbitrator need not be stamped. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Section 43).
A.I.R. 1933 Calcutta 695
-When there is an exhaustion of the power of the Society or its officers when thy invited a decision from the Registrar under Section 73 and when it resulted in an award being passed by the Registrar it would be that award which would be equable to a decree of a competent’ Court that can be executed by the Society. (Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, (53 of 1961), Sections 73 and 71).
(1978) 1 Mad. L.J. 6 = 92 Mad. L.W. 123
-Enforcement of Certificate under Section 98 obtained in respect of award. (Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 24 of 1961), Section 98)).
1978 U.C.R. (Bombay) 510
-Once a certificate is issued for execution of award through a Civil Court, the machinery under Section 98 become functus officio so far as the issue of certificate of execution of award as a decree is concerned. All questions relating to the execution of the award must be decided by a Civil Court under Section 47, Civil Procedure Code. Setting aside a certificate of execution of award under Section 154, is not therefore proper. (Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act (24 of 1961), Section 98 (a), (b) and 154).
A.I.R. 1974 Bombay 295
-Execution of the award Discretion to move either Civil Court or a Collector for execution does not amount to discrimination. (Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act (10 of 1962, Section 103).
A.I.R. 1973 Gujarat 159
-Execution of award-Action by Collector to ensure social justice by treating decretal dues by the judgment-debtor as public dues. (Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act (10 of 1962), Section103).
A.I.R. 1973 Gujarat 159
-Execution of award-Decretal amount if ascertained, aerest without prior notice of demand is not penalty. (Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act (19 of  1962), Section 103).
A.I.R. 1973 Gujarat 159
-Award by Deputy Registrar-Society not filing appeal-Award becomes final. (Madhya Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act 1961, Sec. 55).
(1975) 11 Co-op. L.J. 115
-Service of notice not in any more prescribed by Rule 119-Award  is liable to be cancelled. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Section 43).
A.I.R. 1980 N.O.C. 132
-Registrar has a right to hear appeals from the award of the arbitrator. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Sections 43 and Rule 31).
1960 Nag. L.J. (Notes) 75
-Award cannot be challenged by recourse to Arbitration Act. (Madhya Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, Section 77).
1973 M.P.W.R. 128
-Award of Registrar itself executable in a Civil Court (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Section 43 and Rules 32, 33).
1969 M.P.L.J. 246 = 1969 Jab. L.J. 168 = 1969 M.P.W.R. 137
-Application to declare award unenforceable, is maintainable. (Co-op. Society Act, 1912, Section 2 (d).)
A.I.R. 1960 Allahabad 500
-Question as to validity of award. (Indore Co-operative Societies Act (5 of 1914), S. 3 and 43).
A.I.R. 1957 Madhya Bharat. 56
-There is no express prohibition to the institution of a suit by a member against the other members, except in cases covered by sub-clause (f) of rule 18.Under sub-clause (j). Finality is attached only to the award made by the arbitrator. The award cannot be called in question in any civil or revenue Court, except on proof of a corrupt gratification by the arbitrator. (Co-op. Societies Act, 1912, S. 43 (1) & Rules under, Rule 18 (j).
A.I.R. 1961 Pb. 133 = I.L.R. (1959) Ph. 940
-An arbitrator under the Act cannot be a Civil Court. The award of the arbitrator assumes the character of a decree only by the deeming provision contained in S. 76. (Kerala Co-op. Societies Act, 1969, S. 70).
1979 Ker. L.T. 629
-Award obtained by a Co-op. Society is decree in view of S. 76. (Kerala Co-op. Societies Act, 1969, S. 76).
A.I.R. 1976 (Kerala) 1
-Awards under S.100 are deemed to be decree of Civil Court. (Himachal Pradesh Co-op. Societies Act (13 of 1956), S. 100 read with First Schedule Entry No. 3 and Rule 92 of H.P. Co-op. Societies Rules).
I.L.R. (1973) Himachal Pradesh 210
-Validity of award-Can be challenged in execution-Section 82(3) does not lay any bar. (Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961, S. 83 (3) and (64).
1985 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 1
-Award-Award passed without serving any show cause notice-Award not indicating any details regarding the dispute or the nature of the liability incurred-Mere filling of form-Award quashed. (Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, S 55 and 56).
1983 (11) All India Land Laws Reporter 180
-Amalgamation of Society-An amalgamated Society should be proceeded against before Labour Court-Award passed against a Society which ceased to exist on account of amalgamation is no award in the eyes of law-Award is a nullity liable to be quashed. (Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961, Sec. 13).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 628
-Markfed sued through its District Management-Award passed by the Labour Court-Award not binding on Markfed. (Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961, S. 30).
1984 (2) All India Land Laws Reporter 53
-Award against a surety-Execution of-Surety not party before the Arbitrator-Proceedings in execution can be taken against him. (Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961, Section 55, 56, 63 and 82).
1984 (2) All India Land Laws Reporter 22
-Award against legal representatives of a debtor-Debtor working as cashier of the Co-op. Society-Award is beyond the scope of the Act and has no legal validity so far as the legal representatives are concerned. (Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961, Sections 22, 55 and 56).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 418
-Award-Suit to set aside award-Copy of award necessary. (Bihar & Orissa Co-op. Societies Act, 1935, Section 52 (e), 48).
I.L.R. (1946) Cut. 86
-Arbitration Act, 1940-Award is valid-Principles indicated in the Arbitration Act not applicable-Award not made within 4 months-Award is valid. (Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961, S. 55 and 56).
1984 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 540
-Part of the loan amount realized-A fresh award for the recovery of remaining amount is nullity and inexecutable. (Co-op. Societies Act, 1912, S. 43).
A.I.R. 1972 Rajasthan 227 = 1971 W.L.N. (Part 1) 35 = (1971-72) 7 Co-op. L.J. 281
-Award under the repealed Act of 1953 is to be deemed to be made under repealing Act by virtue of S. 153. (Rajasthan Co-op. Societies Act, (13 of 1956), S. 123, 153.         
(1971) 7 Co-op. L.J. 192 (Rajasthan)
-Limitation for appeal starts from the date of pronouncement of award. (Rajasthan Co-op. Societies Act, (13 of 1965), Sec. 123 (6) (c)).
(1972) 8 co-op. L.J. 106 (Rajasthan)
-An arbitrator under the Co-op. Societies Act is a creature of that Act and the rules framed thereunder. The powers of the arbitrator in giving a decision or award are circumscribed by several conditions. He has to fix the date and place of hearing the dispute, to afford the parties an opportunity of hearing. He has then to record the evidence adduced by the parties. The arbitrator can give his decision or award only upon a consideration of the evidence recorded or produced. (Co-op. Societies Act, 1912, S. 43 & Rules under, Rules 115, 116, 117, 118, 122 and 123.
A.I.R. 1968 Allahabad 22 = 1967 All L.J. 454
-Arbitrator must pass a speaking order-Award should spell out the manner in which conclusions are reached. (Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961, S. 55 and 56).
1983 (11) All India Land Laws Reporter 334
-The provisions of Section 57 have to be read together so as to find out the real-meaning of that section- Once it is found that the award is with-out jurisdiction, the matter comes under Section 57 (3) and under the jurisdiction Societies Act, 1935, Section 57(2) and (3).
(1964) 30 Cut. L.T. 509
-Section 57 (3) clearly vests jurisdiction in the Civil Court in cases where an award is pssed without jurisdiction. (Bihar & Orissa Co-op. Societies Act, 1935 S. (B).
(1964) 30 Cut. L.T. 509
-Award by arbitrator merely delivery of bricks with a direction that a case of default for such delivery claimant is to go for a suit for damages-Arbitrator should have assessed the damages in the alternative. (West Bengal Co-op. Societies Act (38 of 1973), S. 87 and 132).
A.I.R. 1983 Calcutta 125 = 1984 (1) Cal L.J. 141
-Tribunal cancelled the award as being incompetent on ground that the Registrar could have surcharged them under S. 58-Award held was valid and that the facts did not attract. Section 58. (Travancore-Cochin Co-op. Societies Act (10 of 1952), S. 60).
I.L.R. (180) 2 Kerala 9
-Award of an Arbitrator should disclose process of reasoning-Award not speaking-Award set aside. (Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961, S. 55).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 242
-Award passed under Section 51 of Old Act should be deemed to be under Section 73 of the New Act. (Madras Co-op. Societies Act, (53 of 1961), Sec. 96).
(1968) 81 Mad. L.W. 88
-Award-Suit to determine validity-Suit cannot be filed. (Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act (11 of 1966). Section 98).
A.I.R. 1975 Allahabad 12
-An award is on the same footing as a decree of the Court for purpose of execution. (Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Rules, 1968, Rule 137).
A.I.R. 1967 Allahabad 281
-Appeal against an award lies to the Tribunal- (Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, Section 82).
I.L.R. (1980) 2 Kerala 9
-Award in prescribed proforma -No reasons given nor details of claim in support of Award given-Award held to be invalid and set aside. (Rule 79, Punjab Co-operative Societies Rule 1963).
1976 PLJ 41
-All questions relating to execution of award must be decided under Section 47 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 by a Civil Court. (Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act (25 of 1961), Section 154).
A.I.R. 1974 Bombay 295

Basis of Membership
-The Act has allowed membership not on area basis but on the basis of possession of property within the area of operation of the Bank. (Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, Section 31 (4)).
(1971) 7 Co-op. L.J. 201

BENAMIDAR
-Under Section 42 (2) (b) there is no power given to the liquidator to say that a person, who is a member within the meaning of the Co-operative Societies Act, is merely a benamidar. The membership must be taken as it is in the books of the company. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Sections 42 (2) (b), 2, 25 and 43).
A.I.R. 1957 Allahabad 492

Belated Action
-The expression ‘till fresh election’ occurring in Section 73 (2) does not give the Board of Management an indefinite lease of life. The fresh elections contemplated thereunder are to be held either at the end of the regular term of 3 years or of the extended term. Merely because a belated action was taken by the Registrar only on 11.8.83 asking the office-bearers of the petitioner-society to convene a general body meeting of the society in this case it could not be said that in virtue thereof the terms of the petitioner-Chairman or other members or the Board of the petitioner-Society, were automatically extended. (Manipur Co-operative Societies Act, 1970, Section 73).
A.I.R. 1985 N.O.C. 16. (Gauhati)

Beneficiary
-Real beneficiary of loan is either the officer or person in whom he is interested. (Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, (24 of 1961), Section 146 (0).
A.I.R. 1968 Bombay 124 = 1967 Mah .L.J. 988 = 1967 Mah. L.R. 687 = I.L.R. (1967) Bombay 1147

Ballot Paper.
-Where 3 seats are to be filled and 3 voting marks are placed again 3 names and a vertical line against the fourth, the ballot paper is valid. (Karnataka Co-operative Societies Rules, 1960, Rule 14 (12) and (14) (a) (iv).
(1971) 1 Mys. L.J. 538

Bias
-Bias based on some adverse material on record cannot be complained against (Delhi Co-operative Societies Act (35 of 1972), Section 55).
(1976() 12 Co-op. L.J. 147

Burden of Proof
Plaintiff pleading that he was not served with any notice of proceed-taken against him-Defendant to prove that such a notice was duly served. (Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 128
-Charges of criminal misappropriation and misfeasance-The burden in all such cases lies on the complainants. (Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, (24 of 1961), Section 83 (1).
(1977) 3 U.C.R. (Bombay) 78

Bonus
-Officer of Co-operative Society drawing pay exceeding Rs. 300/-Not entitled to bonus. (Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Rules, 1963, Rule 46 (5).
(1973-74) Co-op. L.J. 34 = 85 Mad. L.W. 511
-The bonus, the claim of the employee for one month’s salary for not giving one month’s notice of retrenchment, and compensation for unavailed privilege leave, are all undoubtedly matters touching the business of the Society. (Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act. 1964, Section 61.
(1969) 1 An. W.R. 409 = (1969) 5 Co-op. L.J. 157 = 18 Fac. L.R. 371

Binding Effect
-The words ‘his decision shall be binding’ are susceptible of no other construction than this that a decision of the Registrar under the section is binding so long as it exists and it pre-supposes the existence of a decision. There can be no finality attached to a decision of the Registrar under Section 55 (2), as its binding effect is always subject to the result of an appeal taken from the decision. (Madhya Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, Sections 55 (2). 77 (2). 77 (1).
1969 Jab. L.J. 868 = 1969 M.P.W.R. 807 = 1969 M.P.L.J. 879

Body Corporate
-Status of a Co-operative Society registered under the Act is a body corporate and is independent of its members. (Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 (2 of 1963), Sections 9 and 133).
I.L.R. (1968) Cut. 378 = Cut. L.T. 745 = 22 S.T.C. 460
-Co-operative Society registered under the Act-A body corporate-No officer or Office holder can act on behalf of Co-operative Society suomoto as authorization by a resolution of Co-operative Society to somebody to file an appeal on its behalf is necessary-Absence of any resolution authorizing President to file appeal-Appeal liable to be dismissed. (Section 4, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1980 All India Land Laws Reporter 112

Black Listing
-Black listing of employees of Co-operative Society- Assistant Registrar is not empowered to black list an employee of society or ordering that charge may be taken from him-Order is illegal. (Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, Section 3).
1983 (11) All India Land Laws Reporter 339
-Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Society, black listing an employee of Co-operative Society-Order beyond the provisions of the Act-Tends to impose a stigma-Such an order cannot be passed under the Act. (Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961), Section 3 and 84).
1984 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 94

Board of Management
-Three months time to pay arrears not given-Removal of member from the Board of Management of the Committee is illegal. (Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, (53 of 1961), Section 28 (1) (b) (i).
1975 Co-op. L.R. 60 = (1973) 2 Mad. L.J. 188 = 86 Mad. L.W. 769

Board of Directors
-Advertisement regarding filling of posts-Decision given by the Board of Management challenged in High Court-High Court giving directions regarding the manner in which selection to be made-Directions given on the basis of  an agreement between the parties-Board of Directors bound by the decision-Selection and appointment to be made in accordance with the undertaking given in the High Court. (Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, Section 85).
1983 (2) All India Land Laws Reporter 236
-Board of Directors superseded appointment of an administrator under Section 128 would be conducive to a fair election to the Board of Direction. (Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, (13 of 1965), Sec. 128).
1980 W.L.N. (U.C.) 345 Rajasthan)
-Board of Directors of Bank not fully constituted-Meeting cannot be invalidated for the alleged defect. (M.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, Section 51).
1969 Jab. L.J. 868 = 1969 M.P.W.R. 807 = 1969 M.P.L.J. 879
-Appointment of new Board of Directors by the Government was with-out jurisdiction. Maha. Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, Sec. 73-G and 13). & Maha. Co-operative Societies Rules, Rules 12 and 13).
1984 C.T.J. 510
-Writ will not issue against Board of Directors of Co-operative Society. (Madras Co-operative Societies Act, (6 of 1932), Section 51).
A.I.R. 1962 Madras 169
-Bar under operates only if power of sale under Section 11 (1) is exercised after due compliance with provisions of Section 11 (2), (Assam Co-operative Land Mortgage Bank Act (1 of 1961), Sec. 18).
A.I.R. 1971 Ass. 147 = Ass. L.R. (1971) Ass. 89 = 1974 Co-op. L.R. 403
-Power of bar to writs can be affected by legislative provisions. (Madras Co-operative Societies Act, ( 6 of 1932), Section 13 (3)).
A.I.R. 1955 Mad. 267 = I.L.R. (1955) Mad. 960 = (1956) 1 Mad. L.J. 284
-Bar of jurisdiction in election disputes-Rule not beyond rulemaking power of State Government, (Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Rules, 1968, Rule 134).
A.I.R. 1967 Allahabad 218
-Subject-Matter of suit in regard to title to immovable properties-Bar as to jurisdiction of Civil Court, not applicable. (Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969, Section 69).
1978 Ker. L.T. 836
-Bar of jurisdiction of civil or revenue Courts in respect of any dispute arising under the Act-Such interpretation implies the ouster of the application of the provisions of the Arbitration Act. (Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 : Sections 82 (1) and 82 (3)).
1983 (1) All India Land Laws Reporter 138
-Jurisdiction of Civil Courts-Barred when a special machinery is provided by a special act for the matter to be settled.
Held, that such a dispute has clearly to be settled by recourse to arbitration under the Act and the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts is, therefore, clearly barred, further, that is a settled rule that if a special machinery is provided by a special Act for the determination of disputes and the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts is barred with regard to those disputes, the Civil Courts have no jurisdiction to deal with the matter, the settlement of which is provided for in the special act. (Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961).
1966 Cur. L.J. 119

BREACH OF BYELAWS
-The Society joining the dispute on the member’s undertaking to bear the expenses by itself cannot run counter to the existing interest of the Society in the flat and its obligation to ensure compliance and observation of the bye-laws and regulations in this behalf. The fact thus that a member happens to be a co-disputant or non-disputant turns out to be a beneficiary thereof even when he happens to be himself guilty of the breach of the bye-laws, cannot make any difference whatsoever, We must hasten to add that the averments in the present case show that occupation by the licensee was necessitated due to the exigencies of the employment of the member’s husband and that such occupation was with the permission of the Society. This implies that the member herself is not guilty of any breach of the bye-laws. Breach by the member also cannot be said to be an ingredient of the cause of action in every such case. (Maha. Co-op. Societies Act (24 of 1961), Sec. 91).
A.I.R. 1982 Bombay 428 = 84 Bom L.R. 177

Breach of Understanding
-A dispute based on a breach of the understanding is governed by the rule of six years as provided by sub-rule (2) of Rule 21. (Karnataka Co-op. Societies Rules, 1960, Rule 31 (2)).
(1973) 1 Mys. L.J. 12 = (1973) 9 Co-op. L.J. 59

Breach of Contract
-Whether a fruit growing and preserving Co-op. Society filed a suit against the defendants for damages for breach of contract and the defendants filed a counter-claim it was held that the counter-claim could not be considered as a cross-suit which requires a notice to the co-op. Society under Sec. 76 f the Act. (H.P. Co-op. Societies Act (3 of 1969) Sec. 76).
A.I.R. 1984 H.P. 18 = 1984 Sim. L.C. 92.

Breach of Trust
-The charge of ‘breach of trust’ in the surcharge proceeding under Sec. 49 of the Madras Co-op. Societies Act cannot be equated with ‘criminal breach of trust’ under the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code. Continuous willful negligence on the part of the directors, inaction in a enforcing the provisions     of Bye-laws or Rules, lack of proper supervision and control over the affair of the Society which they are obliged to perform under the provisions of the Act, Rules or Bye-laws resulting in consequential financial loss to the society would tantamount to breach of trust within the meaning of Sec. 49 (1) of the Madras Co-op. Societies Act. But it has to be found by the tribunals with reference to the materials on record and also with reference to the specific obligation of the directors under the provisions of the Act, Rules or Bye-laws. (Madras Co-op. Societies Act (6 of 1932), Sec. 49).
A.I.R. 1984 Orissa 32 = 1984 (2) Co-op. L.J. 124
-Every act of commission or omission amounting to a breach of duty would amount to a breach of trust. (Madras Co-op. Societies Act (6 of 1932), Sec. 49).
1963 Ker. L.T. 393
-Proceedings under Sec. 49 necessary that the misappropriate or breach of trust in relation to the Society should appear in the course of an audit under Sec. 37. (Madras Co-op. Societies Act (6 of 1932), Sec. 49).
(1967) 2 M.L.J. 79 = (1967) 80 Mad. L.W. 445

Business of Society
-The words ‘touching the business of a society’ in Sec. 126 must be given their full import bearing in mind the object of the legislation. The disputes are note to be restricted to matters arising from and out of the business of the Society, but are also to be extended to matters which are in some way concerned or related to the business of the Society. The word ‘business’ is not used in a narrow sense. In order to determine the business of the Society, one has to look into the provisions of the Act, the Rules and the Bye-laws framed by the Society. All matters comprised in them or incidental or are necessary for carrying out those matters must be deemed to be the business f the society. A.P. Co-p. Societies Act, 1964, Sec. 126).
A.I.R. 1981 A.P. 180 = 1981 (1) Andh. L.T. 63 = 1981 (1) And. W.R. 235
-The word ‘business’ in this context does not mean affairs of Society because election of office-bearers, conduct of general meetings and management of a Society would be treated as affairs of a society. In this sub-sec. the word ‘business’ has been used in a narrow sense and it means the actual trading or commercial or other similar business activity of the society which the society is authorized to enter into under the Act and the Rules, and its bye-laws. (Maha. Co-op. Societies Act, 1968, Sec. 91).
A.I.R. 1981 S.C. 152 = 1980 All. L.J. 1073 = 1981 (1) S.C.R. 558
-Word ‘Business’ includes Election dispute. (Co-op. Societies Act, 1912, Sec. 43).
1950 Nagpur L.J. 501
-Ordinarily, if a Society owns buildings and lets out parts of buildings which it is does not require for its own purpose it cannot be said that letting out of those parts is a part of the business of the Society. But it may be that it is the business of a Society to construct and buy houses and let them out to its members. In that case letting out property may be part of its business. (Maha. Co-op. Societies Act (24 of 1961), Sec. 91 (1).
A.I.R. 1969 Sup. Court. 1320 = (1969) 5 Co-op. L.J. 135 = 72 Bom. L.R. 418 = 1970 Mah. L.J. 301
-The word ‘business’ in sub-section (1) of Sec. 91 has been used in narrower sense and it means the actual trading or other similar business activity which the society is authorized to enter into under the Act and the Rules and bye-laws. (Maha. Co-op. Society Act (24 of 1961), Sec. 91 (1)).
A.I.R. 1969 Sup. Co.1320 = (1965) 5 Co-op. L.J. 135 = 1970 Mad. L.J. 301 = 72 Bom. L.R. 418
-Business is not confined to money business. (Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, Section 43).
A.I.R. 1925 Allahabad 356
-The employment and dismissal of staff cannot be said to be part of its business. (Bombay Co-op. Societies Act, 1925, Sec. 54 (as extended to Delhi).
A.I.R. 1974 Delhi. 132 = 1973 Rajdhani L.R. 247 = I.L.R. (1973) 1 Delhi 564 = 1974 Co-op. L.J. 155 = 1974 Co-op. L.R. 295
-The business has to be that of the Society i.e., the corporate activity the society and what the permissible corporate activities of the society are have to be gathered from the sections of the Act, the rules framed under the Act and the bye-laws made by the corporation which are intra vires the Act. (Madras Co-op. Societies Act (6 of 1932), Sec. 51).
A.I.R. 1954 Mad. 103 = I.L.R. (1953) Mad. 1047 = 76 Mad. L.W. 821 = 1952 Mad. W.N. 515
-The dispute in question is regarding the business of the Society, namely, that of advancing loans. The plaintiffs were bound to refer the dispute to the Registrar of Co-op. Societies. The Civil Court cannot entertain a suit regarding a dispute which under Sec. 64 of the present Act should be referred to the Registrar of Co-op. Societies. (Madhya Pradesh Co-op. Societies Act, 1961, Sec. 96, 64, 82 and Bhopal State Co-op. Societies Act, 1937, Sec. 734).
1970 M.P.L.J. (Notes) 93
-Business of the Society-Society established with a view to provide supply of seed, manure, agricultural implements ect.-Raising of loan not stipulated as one of the business of the society-Society raising loan for the purpose of giving assistance to its members-Not covered by the term business of the society. (Punjab Co-op. Societies Act, 1961, Sec. 55, 56, 59 and 82).
1982 All India Land Laws Reporter 515
-Scrutiny Committee is not governing body of registered Society which can given directions in regard to business of society. (Madras Co-op. Societies Act (53 of 1961), Sec. 2 (8) and 2 (2).
A.I.R. 1967 Madras 182 = (1966) 2 M.L.J.415 = 79 Mad. L.W. 713
-The scale of the produce belonging to the members of the Society is part of the business of the society and as such is business of the Society. (Madras Co-op. Societies Act (6 of 1932). Sec. 51).
AIR 1965 S.C. 621 = (1965) 2 Mad. LJ (SC) 111 = (1965) 2 An. W.R. (S.C.) 11 = 1965) 2 S.C.J. 627
 -The Cashier serving the co-op. society defalcated some funds of the society and the society took sale deed of the lands of the cashier as a repayment of the defalcated amount and consequent the amount of the society stood satisfied. The reliefs claimed by he society did not concern the business of the society as it was not the business of the society to purchase lands. The proper forum in such a case would not be co-op. Court but a Civil Court. (Maharashtra Co-op. Societies Act (24 of 1961), Sec. 93, 91, Explanation 2).
A.I.R. 1984 Bombay 362
-Where the Society constructs a building for housing its members, and the flats therein are intended for their occupation only, the Society is recipient of several concessions in the matter of allotment of plots, securing of the controlled building materials, stamp duty etc. The builders constructing buildings and selling flats as part of their business may not be recipient of all such benefits even though they are under a statutory obligation to form a co-op. society of such purchasers of the flats, to ensure achievement of the same object. The ownership of the flats in such cases vests partly in the Society and partly in the members, who are entitled to the possession of the flats as an incidence of their membership and shareholding in accordance with the scheme of the bye-laws of such Society. The business of the Society in all such cases does not come to an end merely on construction of the building and putting the members in possession of the flats therein. The common problems created by co-existence of several members in a Society’s building makes the continuance of the supervision and  intervention by the Society indispensable as also the assertion of its ownership whenever it becomes necessary in terms of the bye-laws. The provisions of the bye-laws requiring the members to remain in possession of the flats and permitting possession thereof by non-members only with the permission of the Society for a limited period, require constant supervision and interference by the Society to prevent their evasion. (Maharashtra Co-op. Societies Act, (24 of 1961), Sec. 91).
A.I.R. 1982 Bombay 428 = 84 Bom. L.R. 177
-Insurance is part of business of Society-Directly attracted. (Madras Co-op. Societies Act (6 of 1932), Sec. 51).
A.I.R. 1955 Madras 694 = I.L.R. (1956) Madras 547 = (1955) 2 Mad. L.J. 363 = 68 Mad. L.W. 641
-There must be State aid, amounting to not less than 2 lakhs of rupees, to any co-op. Society. The State Government must be satisfied that is necessary in the public interest to take power to exercise such control over the conduct of business of such society as shall suffice in the opinion of the State Government to safeguard the interest of the society and it must be done by a notification in the official Gazette. (Mys. Co-op. Societies Act (52 of 1948), Sec. 54).
I.L.R. (1966) Mys. 687 = (1966) 1 Mys. L.J. 243 = (1966) 5 Law Rep. 709
-Business of Punjab Government (Allocation) Rules 1966-Standing orders-If Retrospective effect can be given to validate order passed without jurisdiction-Officer not empowered to hear revision petition deciding the revision u/s 69-Order held to be without jurisdiction-Subsequent empowering of Officer to hear revision cannot validate the order-Constitution of India, Art. 166. (Sec. 69, Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961).
1973 P.L.J. 49
-Act can be extended to co-op. Societies doing Banking business. (Uttar Pradesh Co-op. Soc. Act (11 of 1966), Sec. 1, 3).
1980 U.J. (S.C.) 673
-The power of State Government to control the conduct of business of any society should not be arbitrary or unreasonable but should be limited to safeguard its investment. The word ‘Control’ is a word of limitation and not wide enough to include power to take over ownership of the management. (Kant. Co-op. Act, 1959, Sec. 54, 29, 30, 30 and 121).
(1973) 2 Mys. L.J. 43
-Definition of the expression ‘officer’ is an inclusive definition. An inclusive definition widens the etymological meaning of the expression or term including therein that which would ordinarily not be comprehended therein. Firstly, keeping apart the expansive definition by including officers who would otherwise not be comprehended in the expression ‘officer’, it may be necessary to ascertain whether first respondent, giving the expression ‘officer’ its ordinary etymological meaning, would be comprehended therein. It may be noticed that the legislature never intended to include every employee or servant of the society within the expression ‘officer’. There is some element of a right to command in the word ‘officer’ with someone whose duty it would be to obey. If there is an officer ordinarily there will be someone subordinate to him, the officer enjoying the power to command and give directions and subordinate to obey or carry out directions. It may be that even one who is to carry out directions may be an officer in relation to his subordinates. Thus, what is implicit in the expression ‘officer’ is made explicit by the later part of definition which provides that such other persons would also be an officer who is empowered under the rules and bye-laws to give directions with regard to the business of the society. (U.P. Co-op. Societies Rules, 1936, Rules 115, 134).
A.I.R. 1981 S.C. 152 = 1980 All L.J. 1073 = 1981 (1) S.C.R. 558
-It is part of the business of the co-op. society to hold general meetings of the members, to withdraw and expel members, if necessary, because otherwise the society would be unable to function. (Co-op. Societies Act, 1912, Sec. 43 & Rule under, Rule 18).
A.I.R. 1954 Himachal Pradesh 63

1 comment:

Narayana Hegde said...

Is the registrar entitled to deny a petition, regarding the misappropriation of funds by the Managing Body and Executives, filed under Sec.70(1) of the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act 1959, under the pretext that the petitioner has not personally suffered any loss?

allnews International Cooperative Alliance National Cooperative Union of India Kerala State Cooperative Union Cental Ministry of agriculture and Cooperation Kerala Cooperative Department Minister for Cooperation, Kerala Kerala Laws NCDC NABARD Reserve Bank of India NAFED NCCF Cooperative Service Examination Board KPSC KSCB civil services UPSC