Judgement

OZA, J. :- This appeal is by certificate granted by the High Court of Gujarat under Art. 133 of the Constitution of India by its order dated 6-4-73. The High Court by its order dated 6-4-73 dismissed the petition filed by the appellant questioning the correctness of the order of the Gujarat Co-operative Tribunal.

2. The facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that appellant is a co-operative housing society registered with the Registrar of Co-operative Societies Gujarat under the provisions of the Act. It is alleged that this Society was formed on 2nd May, 1961 with the object of providing housing facilities to its members. Respondent No. 1 Panchal Keshavlal Narbheram was a founder member of this Society along with 11 others. It is alleged that the conduct of respondent No. 1 was found to be detrimental to the interest of the Society and its working and the Society therefore invoked the provisions of S. 36 of the Act, passed a resolution dated 19-6-65 to expel respondent No. 1 from the membership of the Society. A further opportunity to show cause was given to the respondent and on November 28, 1965 the appellant society passed a resolution expelling respondent No. 1 from the membership of the Society.

3. This resolution of the Society was duly approved by the Registrar of Societies as required under S. 36 of the said Act on 13-4-66.

4. On 17-2-66 respondent No. 1 instituted another proceedings under S. 96(1) with the Registrar of Co-operative Societies seeking relief of setting aside of the resolution passed by the Society against respondent No. 1. The Registrar entertaining the dispute and exercising powers conferred under S. 98(1) referred the dispute for decision to his nominee and out of these proceedings ultimately the present appeal arises.

5. On July 16, 1966 the Registrars nominee dismissed respondent No. 1s claim by his order dated 16-7-66. Thereafter respondent No. 1 carried the matter to the Tribunal by way of an appeal i.e. Appeal No. 119 of 1966.

6. That on August 25, 1967 the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the respondent and remanded the matter to the Registrars nominee for a fresh decision in accordance with law.

7. After remand the parties proceeded with the trial and adduced oral evidence before the Registrars nominee but during the trial on 16-2-70 the appellant-society made an application under sub-sec. (2) of S. 96 to the District Registrar that the question relating to the expulsion of respondent No. 1 hadalready been decided in the sense that in the collateral proceedings the Registrar had recorded his approval under S. 36 of the Act to the action taken by the Society and therefore the dispute did not survive. On this application the District Registrar heard the parties and came to the conclusion that respondent No. 1 was precluded from contending that the impugned resolution expelling him from the membership of the society was illegal inasmuch as he had not preferred any appeal against the decision of the Registrar according his approval to the action taken by the Society under S. 36.

8. The District Registrar was of the opinion that doctrine of res judicata was attracted and therefore there was no dispute in existence between the parties. This order passed by the District Registrar on 19-6-70 was taken up in revision under S. 150. Sub-clause (9) of the Act to the Tribunal. the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the District Registrar had no jurisdiction to reopen the question as to whether or not the matter referred by respondent No. 1 was a dispute within the meaning of sub-sec. (1) of S. 96 at this subsequent stage. The view taken was that having already decided that the matter constituted a dispute under S. 96(1) at an early stage before he made a reference to the Registrars nominee in exercise of powers under S. 97, the powers under sub-sec. (2) of S. 96 were exhausted and it was not competent for him to review his earlier decision. Accordingly the Tribunal by its order dated 6-2-71