In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
R.K. DESHPANDE, J.
Prakash Vrundavan Thakkar
Versus
The Nagpur Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd. & Others
Arbitration Appeal No. 4 of 2013
Decided On: 23-01-2014
Arbitration - Jurisdiction - Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 - Section 84 - Section 3(n) - Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act - Form 'K' - [84, 3(n), 26, Form 'K'] - The court discussed the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal under Section 84 of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002, and the definition of 'member' under Section 3(n). It emphasized the requirement for a person to be admitted as a member according to the rules and byelaws of the society. The court highlighted the significance of Form 'K' and its execution by a society member as per the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, and concluded that the absence of evidence showing the petitioner's membership led to an error in the judgment of the Principal District Judge.
Fact of the Case:
The dispute involved the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal under Section 84 of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002, regarding the membership of the petitioner with the respondent no.1 society, which was crucial for the tribunal's decision.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the absence of evidence demonstrating the petitioner's membership in the society led to an error in the judgment of the Principal District Judge, and subsequently allowed the appeal, quashing the judgment and order, the arbitral award, and the order of payment of costs against the petitioner.
Issues: The issues revolved around the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal under Section 84 of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002, and the membership status of the petitioner with the respondent no.1 society.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of evidence proving the petitioner's membership in the society, as required by the rules and byelaws, leading to an error in the judgment of the Principal District Judge.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the judgment and order, the arbitral award, and the order of payment of costs against the petitioner were quashed and set aside. The respondent no.1 society was directed to refund an amount to the petitioner within a specified period.
1. Admit.
Shri Soni, the learned counsel waives service of notice for respondent no.1. Though the other respondents are served, no one appears for them.
Since the dispute is between the appellant and the respondent no.1, it is not necessary for this Court to issue fresh notices to the respondent nos. 2 and 3 and the matter can be heard finally.
Hence, by consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties, the matter is herd finally.
2. The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 8th November, 2012, passed by the learned Principal District Judge at Nagpur, in Misc. Civil Application No. 121/2007, filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act) by the appellant for setting aside the arbitral award to the extent it operates against the petitioner.
3. The question involved before the learned Principal District Judge in the application under Section 34 of the said Act was regarding the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal to entertain, try and decide the dispute referred to it under Section 84 of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was a guarantor for the loan borrowed by respondent no.3. Since there was no repayment of loan by the respondent no.3, the reference of dispute was made by the Bank under Section 84 of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002, to the Arbitrator.
4. In the earlier round of litigation, this court had set aside the order passed by the learned District Judge, dismissing the application under Section 34 of the said Act and the matter was remanded back to the learned District Judge to decide the issue of membership of the petitioner with the respondent no.1 society, which goes to the root of the matter and upon which the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal to decide the reference under Section 84 of the the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, against the petitioner, depends.
5. In the judgment and order impugned in this appeal, the learned Principal District Judge has relied upon Form “k” signed by the petitioner and tendered to the respondent no.1 Society. The learned Principal District Judge has also relied upon the deed of guarantee signed by the petitioner and it has been held that it is established that the appellant was the member of the respondent no.1 society.
6. The dispute has been referred to an arbitrator under Section 84(1)(b) of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, which is reproduced below.
“84. Reference of disputes – (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, if any dispute [other than a dispute regarding disciplinary action taken by a multi-State co-operative society against its paid employee or an industrial dispute as defined in clause (k) of section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) touching the constitution, management or business of a multi-State co-operative society arises –
(a) ....
(b) between a member, past members and persons claiming through a member, past member or deceased member and the multi-State co-operative society, its board or any officer, agent or employee of the multi-State co-operative society or liquidator, past or present, or
........”
It is apparent from the aforesaid provision that unless it is shown that a dispute is between a member, past member or the person claiming through a member, past member or deceased member and the multi-State cooperative society, its Board or any officer, agent or employee of the multi-State co-operative society or liquidator, past or present, no dispute can be referred to the arbitrator.
7. Clause (n) of Section 3 of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, defines “member” as under.
“3(n) “member” means a person joining in the application for the registration of a multi-State co-operative society and includes a person admitted to membership after such registration in accordance with
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.