A dispute between a licensor and a licensee over a flat in a building belonging to a co-operative housing society does not fall within the purview of section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, unless the co-operative housing society is effectively interested in ensuring that possession of the premises is recovered back from the licensee-occupant.

S. K. DESAI J.- The petitioner in this special civil application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India was opponent No. 1 in Arbitration Case No. ABN IV. 83 of 1970, which was a dispute under section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, before the District Deputy Registrar of Co· operative Societies, Bombay. In the said dispute raised by respondent No. I to this special civil application (hereinafter referred to as the licensor), the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the licensee) had contended that the dispute between him and the licensor did not touch the business of the Jhulelal Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., who is respondent No.2 to this special civil application, that he was a tenant of the licensor, and that the Court of Small Causes at Bombay alone had the jurisdiction to entertain the dispute between him and the licensor. The preliminary point as to whether the dispute fell within the requirements of section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Cooperative Societies Act), was decided by the Officer on Special Duty, who is respondent No.3 before us, by his order dated September 7, 1970, holding that the dispute was one which fell within section 91 of the Co-operative Societies Act ; and accordingly he fixed the further hearing of the matter before himself. Being aggrieved by the said decision of respondent No.3, the licensee, has preferred this special civil application, in which rule was issued and interim stay of further proceedings granted on December 16, 1970. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, certain facts are required to be stated.

2. Respondent No.2 before us is a co-operative housing society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, and the licensor is a member of the said co-operative housing society, having been allotted Flat No.2 in a building on Plot No. 500, 16th Road, Khar, Bombay 52. A leave and licence agreement was made in respect of the said flat between the licensor and the licensee; a copy of the said agreement is annexed as exh. 'A' to this special civil application. In the said agreement the licensor is described as the owner of Flat No.2, and a licence is purportedly granted to the licesee in respect of the said flat initially for a period of eleven months, with an option to the licensee to renew the agreement for two further periods of eleven months each on the terms and conditions mentioned in the said agreement, of which one was to pay compensation of Rs. 350 per month to the licensor, the compensation for each month being payable on the 7th day of the said month. Under the said agreement, the licensee was required to deposit with the "licensor the sum of Rs. 1,050 which represents an amount equivalent to three months' compensation under the said agreement. Again, the agreement recites that on the expiry of the initial period of eleven months or such further periods (under the powers given to the licensee for extension), the licensee has to hand over peaceful possession of the premises in good and proper condition to the licensor. We are not concerned with the other terms of the said agreement. According to the licensor, on the expiry of the initial period of eleven months, which was on March 31, 1969, the agreement was not renewed by the licensee. According to him, further, the licensee had also committed several breaches of the terms of the said agreement and also failed and neglected to pay as from December 1, 1968 the compensation due and payable by him to the licensor under the said agreement. Accordingly in June 1970 a dispute was sought to be raised before the District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bombay; in which the licensor sought recovery of vacant possession of the said flat as also an order directing the licensee to pay to the licensor a sum of Rs. 6,300 being the arrears of compensation and further compensation at the agreed rate of Rs. 350 per