SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1984 Supreme(Raj) 243

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
K.S.Lodha, J.
Ram Prakash - Appellant
Versus
The State of Rajasthan And Ors. - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 170 of 1976.
Decided On : 27-01-1984

The admission of liability by the borrower before the Assistant Registrar was binding on him and could not be challenged in a writ petition.

Headnote:

RAJASTHAN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1965 - SECTION 117 - INTEREST - RATE OF INTEREST - ADMISSION BY BORROWER - BINDING EFFECT - WRIT PETITION - SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW - CONSENT ORDER - CHALLENGE TO - MAINTAINABILITY.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a member of the respondent society, challenged the order of the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, directing him to pay the outstanding loan amount along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The petitioner contended that the society was not a credit society and the amount outstanding was not a loan, that the Assistant Registrar could not have exercised jurisdiction under Section 117 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1965, and that he should have proceeded under Section 77 of the Act. The petitioner also contended that he had not admitted the liability to pay the principal amount and interest, and that he was not given a copy of the society's application before the Assistant Registrar.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the petitioner could not challenge the liability to pay the principal amount and interest, as he had admitted the same before the Assistant Registrar. The court also held that the Assistant Registrar was justified in exercising jurisdiction under Section 117 of the Act, as there was no dispute raised in respect of the debt or demand, but only a prayer for instalment or scaling down of interest. The court further held that the petitioner's contention that he was not given a copy of the society's application was not tenable, as he had already filed his reply to the notice under Section 117 of the Act.

Issues: 1. Whether the Assistant Registrar could have exercised jurisdiction under Section 117 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1965, in the circumstances of the case. 2. Whether the petitioner had admitted the liability to pay the principal amount and interest. 3. Whether the petitioner was entitled to a copy of the society's application before the Assistant Registrar.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Assistant Registrar was justified in exercising jurisdiction under Section 117 of the Act, as there was no dispute raised in respect of the debt or demand, but only a prayer for instalment or scaling down of interest. 2. The petitioner had admitted the liability to pay the principal amount and interest before the Assistant Registrar. 3. The petitioner was not entitled to a copy of the society's application before the Assistant Registrar, as he had already filed his reply to the notice under Section 117 of the Act.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.

JUDGMENT

1. - The Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Ganga Nagar issued a notice dated 31-9-70 to the petitioner Ram Prakash saying that a sum of Rs. 12,441.20 principal+5,514.70 interest total 17,955.90 was out-standing against the petitioner to the Ganganagar Kisan Co-operative Marketing Society Ltd., Sri Ganganagar on account of loan till 12th December, 1970 which had not been paid by the petitioner and, therefore, he should either deposit the above amount with the said society by 15-1-71 under intimation to the Assistant Registrar or if he had any objection to this demand, he may submit the same to him by 15-8-71.On 16-8-71 the petitioner appeared before the Assistant Registrar & asked for a copy of the 'Khata' & also requested that the account may be explained to him. He filed an application (Ex 8) in this respect. Thereafter on 5-,0-71 the petitioner filed a reply (Ex. 3) to the notice stating that the rate of interest had not been settled between him and the society and that only interest at the Government rate should therefore, be charged against him. The other request made was that the petitioner was a poor cultivator and, therefore, the petitioner may be allowed to pay the amount in easy instalments. There upon the learned Assistant Registrar by his order dated 5-10-71 (Ex.4) found that the interest at the rate of 12% per annum was being charged by the society from all the members and, therefore, it was proper to charge the same rate of interest from the petitioner. He found that on 30-6-71 a sum of Rs. 19,448.84 was outstanding against the petitioner. The petitioner admitted this amount and, therefore, he was directed that he should pay the amount by 15-11-71. It was also directed that interest at the rate of 12% per annum shall continue on this amount from 1-7-71. Aggrieved of this order the petitioner filed a revision before the Registrar, Co-operative Societies but the same was rejected on 24-9 73 vide Annx 6. Still Aggrieved by the order of the learned Registrar the petitioner filed a further revision before the Government and the same was heard by the Special Secretary Co-operative Deptt. who rejected the the same on 2-12-75. The petitioner has now approached this Court by way of a writ application praying that the order of the Assistant Registrar dated 5-10-71 and those of the Registrar and the Special Secretary, Co-operative Department, Government of Rajasthan referred to above may be quashed.

2. The case of the petitioner is that respondent No. 5 Ganganagar Kisan Co operative Marketing Society Ltd. was not a credit society nor the amount outstanding against the petitioner was a loan and, therefore, the society could not have moved the Assistant Registrar for the recovery of the same and the Assistant Registrar could not have exercised the power under Section 117 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 that no interest was settled between the petitioner and the society and, therefore, no interest was chargeable but the learned Assistant Registrar did not make any enquiry in this respect. It was also the case of the petitioner that the Assistant Registrar should not have invoked his power under Section 117 of the Act in the circumstances of this case but resort should have been made to Section 77 of the Act. It was also contended that a copy of the application made to the Assistant Registrar was not supplied to the petitioner either along with notice or even after the demand and, therefore, the petitioner was not in a position to raise objections to the same. He, therefore, did not have proper opportunity of hearing and the proceedings before the Assistant Registrar were thus vitiated. It was also contended that the petitioner never admitted the amount being due and the statement contained in the order dated 5-10-71 that the petitioner admitted the liability is patently wrong. It was further contended that the learned Registrar, Co-operative Societies wrongly upheld the order of the Assistan








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top