(1) Respondent No. 1 is a co-operative ginning and pressing society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act. The society purchases cotton from its members and sells it to other persons. On 25-11-1962 an auction was held by the respondent-society. At that auction the petitioners offered the highest bids for three lots of cottion. They also paid, Rs. 11,000 in part payment of the price of the cotton. As the petitioners did not take delivery of the cotton or make further payments the society approached the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, under section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for the dispute being decided under the provisions of the Act . The Registrar referred the dispute to his nominee under section 93 of the Act. Before the nominee an objection was raised that the dispute did not come within the purview of section 91 as the petitioners were not members of the respondent society and that consequently the nominee had no jurisdiction to decide it. The nominee referred the matter to the Registrar for decising the question under Section 91 (2). The Assistant Registrar, who heard the matter, was of the opinion that the transactions between the petitioners and the society were under the provisions of S. 45 and consequently clause (c) in sub-section (1) of section 91 applied to them. he, therefore, held that there was a dispute within the meaning of sub-section (1) of section 91 and sent back the matter to the nominee for his decision. That order is being challenged before us. Before this order was made the petitioners had also filed a civil suit against the society for the return of the amount of Rs. 11,000 which they had paid to the society

(2) Sub-section (1) of section 91 of the Act provides that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, any dispute touching, the . . . . . . . ... business of a society shall be referred by any of the parties to the dispute, . . . . to the Registrar, if both the parties thereto are one or other of persons mentioned in clauses (a) to (e) in this sub-section. The petitioners are not members of the respondent society. The only clause which can apply to them is clause (c) which is as follows:

"(c) a person other than a member of the society, who has been granted a loan bythe society, or within whom the society has or had transactions under the provisions of section 45, and any person claiming through such a person;"

Section 45 states that save as is provided in the Act, the transactions of a society with persons other than members, shall be subject to such restrictions, if any, as may be prescribed. The word "prescribed" is defined in clause (21) of section 2 to mean "prescribed by rules". This section does not empower a society to enter into transaction with persons other than members. It empowers the State Government to make rtules prescribing the restrictions under which a society may enter into transaction with non-members. No society can, therefore, enter into any such transaction unless it is in accordance with the prescribed restrictions. The power to enter into such transactions is, however, conferred by section 36, which states that the registration of a society shall render it a body corporate by the name under which it is registered with power to enter into contracts and to do all such things as are necessary for the purpose for which it si constituted. No transactions are, therefore, entered into under section 45. The effect of this section only is to prohibit a Society from entering into transactions with persons other than members except in accordance with such restrictions as may be prescribed under this section. Literally construed, therefore, the words "transactions under the provisions of section 45" in clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 91 convey no meaning. No words in a statute should, however, be deemed to have been used without some purpose and the Cour