A dispute between a housing cooperative society and a person having a transaction with it, concerning the business or affairs of the society, is barred from being heard by the Civil Court under Section 102 of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006.

Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.

1. This First Appeal is directed against an order being No. 12 dated 14th March, 2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) 2nd Court at Barasat in Title Suit No. 1306 of 2015 at the instance of the plaintiff/appellant.

2. By the impugned order, the plaint filed by the plaintiff praying for declaration, injunction and for recovery of money on account of damages and interest was rejected by the learned Trial Judge under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure as the learned Trial Judge was of the view that the present suit is barred under Section 102 of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006.

3. In connection with the said appeal, three interlocutory applications were filed by the appellant.

4. Since the fate of those interlocutory applications are dependant upon the fate of this appeal, we have decided to decide the appeal itself on merit, before dealing with the interlocutory applications filed in connection with this appeal.

5. Let us now consider as to how far the learned Trial Judge was justified in passing the impugned order in the facts of the present case.

6. It is well-settled principle of law that while considering an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Court is required to consider the pleadings made out in the plaint itself and the annexures thereto for ascertaining as to whether the plaint is liable to be rejected on any of the grounds as mentioned therein. While considering an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the code of Civil Procedure, the Court cannot consider any other document and/or material beyond the pleadings made out in the plaint and/or annexures thereto. As such, we restrict ourselves to the pleadings of the plaintiff and/or annexures thereto for ascertaining as to whether the plaint is liable to be rejected as it is barred under the provision contained in Section 102 of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006 or not.

7. In this regard, we have considered the pleadings of the plaintiff made out in the plaint meticulously. On reading the plaint, we find that the plaintiff filed the suit challenging wrongful termination of the building contract entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant No.1. The defendant No.1 is a Cooperative Housing Society Limited registered under the Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 and is deemed to have been registered as per the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006 in terms of Section 6(2) of the said Act. By the said agreement the plaintiff was engaged by the defendant No.1 to construct a G+4 building on the suit land. Pursuant to the said agreement the plaintiff claims to have raised construction upto plinth level. The plaintiff further claims that some additional construction above plinth area was also constructed by him, on the basis of the work order issued by the defendant No.1 in pursuance of the said agreement entered into between the parties. Subsequently, the said agreement and/or the work order was cancelled by the defendant No.1 and the plaintiff was prevented by the defendant No.1 and the other anti-social hooligans like the defendant No.2 from raising further construction on the said premises and, as a result, the plaintiff is unable to raise further construction therein though he collected huge building materials for raising further construction in the suit property. In these set of facts the plaintiff filed the said suit seeking the following reliefs:

A. A decree of declaration that the agreement dated 17-11-2014 including the work order and/or the estimation of the project is a valid agreement and the same is still subsisting in the eye of law and binding upon the parties to the said agreement.

B. A decree of declaration that the letter dated 9.05.2015 issued by the defendant no.1 is illegal, ultra vires, bad-in-law and without jurisdiction.

C. A decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants and its men, agents servants and associates