ORDER :

(Prayer : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 17.03.2016 made in I.A.No.9207 of 2015 in O.S.No.2446 of 2015 on the file of the learned VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.)

1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 17.03.2016 made in I.A.No.9207 of 2015 in O.S.No.2446 of 2015 on the file of the learned VI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, thereby dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner to reject the plaint.

2. Mr.P.Anbarasan, the learned counsel for the petitioner in the Civil Revision Petition submitted that the deceased first respondent is the plaintiff and the petitioner is the third defendant. The deceased first respondent filed suit in O.S.No.2446 of 2015, for declaration declaring that the letters issued by the petitioner dated 07.04.2015, thereby cancelled the allotment of the house bearing No.111, Journalist Colony, Thiruvanmiyur, as null and void and other reliefs. While pending the suit, the petitioner filed petition for rejection of plaint on the ground that the suit itself is barred by law.

2.1. The petitioner is a registered Cooperative Society and the deceased first respondent is the member of the society. If any dispute relates to the business of the society and there is a statutory obligation for the parties to resort to Section 90 of the Tamilnadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 which provides for arbitration of such disputes. Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1986 makes it mandatory for a judicial authority, before which an action is brought in a matter, which is the subject matter of an arbitration agreement, shall refer the parties to arbitration. The deceased first respondent has filed suit challenging the order dated 07.04.2015 passed by the petitioner thereby cancelling the allotment of house site to the deceased first respondent which is well within the realm of the contract between the society and the deceased first respondent for allotment of house sites and that such disputes have to be first referred to arbitration under Section 90 of the Tamilnadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983.

2.2. He further submitted that Section 156 of the Tamilnadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983, specifies that no order, decision or action taken under the said Act by an Officer authorised or empowered shall be liable to be called in question in any court and no injunction shall be granted by any Court in respect of anything which is done or intended to be done under the Act. The impugned order in the suit is one passed by the authorised person. Jurisdiction civil Court has no power, as the Act expressly provides for legal remedy under Section 90 of the Tamilnadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983. However, without considering the above, the Court below dismissed the petition for rejection of plaint. In support of his contention, he relied upon the following judgments:

(i) Rajamani Vs. Cooperative Sugars Ltd Chithur reported in 1989 TLNJ 213

(ii) Sarangan Vs. Vadivelu Mudaliar and others reported in (2009) 3 MLJ 463

(iii) Seni and others Vs City Civil Court, Chennai and others in WP.No.34692 of 2014

(iv) Gopalakrishnan and others Vs. Secretary to Government Housing and Urban Development Department in WP.No.24649 of 2007

3. Per contra, Mr.S.Parthasarathy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the deceased first respondent is the journalist and the Government of Tamilnadu has extended the cash benefits to the journalists. The petitioner Society was formed for the purpose of allotment of land to the allottees. Accordingly, he had paid amount towards cost of the land and the petitioner Society was formed for operation of the said scheme. The members of the Society approached Indian Bank for loan to build houses for journalists. The petitioner Society never paid other amount either towards cost of the land or towards co