( 1 ) AN interesting question has been raised namely as to whether the jurisdiction of the Civil Court would be ousted in a case where damages for malicious prosecution are sought by an ex-officebearer of a co-operative society against the society concerned and its present office-bearers. The trial Court has taken the view that the Registrars Nominee alone would have jurisdiction by reason of the provision contained in sec. 96 read with sec. 166 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act 1961 (hereafter called the Act) and has ordered that the plaint should be returned to the plaintiff for presentation before the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The plaintiff has preferred the present appeal from order and has contended that the trial Court was in error in holding that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction in the matter.

( 2 ) THE combined effect of sec. 96 and 98 inter alia is that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law any dispute touching the constitution management or business of society shall be referred to the Registrars Nominee. The question therefore is whether a claim for damages for malicious prosecution would fall within the parameters of t