The interpretation of the scope of the expression 'any dispute touching a business of a co-operative society' and the applicability of Section 64 (1) (c) of the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.

( 1 ) THIS revision is filled by defendant No. 1 against the order of the learned III Additional Disst. Judge, Sagar in Civil Suit No. 44-A/1991 holding that he has jurisdiction to try the civil suit, which was filed by the non-applicant No, 1 herein claiming damages for breach of contract.

( 2 ) THE learned counsel for the applicant argued that for construction of a cold storage, the tender of the non-applicant No. 1/plaintiff was accepted on 15-1-1981 ; that because of the lethargic attitude of the plaintiff and breach of contract, the applicant/first defendant was constrained to rescind work and that without exhausting the remedy of arbitration provided under clause 29 of the agreement entered into between the plaintiff and the first defendant, the plaintiff has rushed to the civil court.

( 3 ) THE learned counsel further argued that the learned Additional district Judge Sagar by the impugned order dated 15-3-1993 has assumed jurisdiction in a civil suit, which is barred by Section 64 of M. P. Co-operative societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and that order is therefore, liable to be set aside. In support of his contention, he relied upon the decision of the Sepreme Court reported in Keshava v. Mandal Co-op. M. S. , 1970 MPLJ 770, holding that a claim before the civil court is not maintainable as it concerns a dispute touching the business of the society.

( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the non-applicant No. 1/plaintiff argued that the contract between the parties related to the construction of cold storage ; that the dispute between the parties does not relate to the business of the society and that for attracting Section 64 (1) (c) of the Act, plurality of transactions is accessary and a single transaction is not enough. The learned counsel, basing on the decision of this Court in Kundansing v. State of M. P. , 1979 MPLJ 203, argued that plurality of transactions is a sine qua non for attracting provisions of Section 64 (1) (c) of the Act.

( 5 ) THE word "touching the constitution, management or business of a society" have no bearing on the words "business by a co-operative society. " the scope of the expression "any dispute touching a business of a co-operative society" is wider than that of the expression "any dispute as regard the business of co-operative society". As held by the Supreme Court in D. M. Co-op. Bank v. Dalichand, AIR 1969 SC 1320 the word "touching" is very wide and would include any matter which relates to or concerns the business of a society. The first defendant is a co-operative society formed by the farmers for upliftment of their conditions through the process of co-operative movements. Therefore, it cannot be said that the construction of a cold storage does'not touch the business of the society. When there is admittedly a dispute between the plaintiff and the defendants with regard to the cold storage, it certainly amounts to a dispute touching the business of the society for which Section 64 (1) is applicable. ( 6 ) THE objection raised by the learned counsel for the non-applicant no. 1 is that under Clause 29 of the agreement admittedly entered into between the parties, there is an arbitration clause and it is only the civil court under Section 20 of the ARBITRATION ACT, 1940 that can have jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator. The agreement entered into between the parties, clause 29 of which provides for an arbitration clause is not disputed, But on that score, it is not necessary that the plaintiff can seek the relief only before a civil court. The Supreme Court in Jugal Kihore v. Sitamarhi Co-op. Bank, AIR 1967 SC 1494 held that the Registrar under the Co-operative societies Act, to all intents and purposes, is a Court discharging the same functions and duties in the same manner as a Court of law is expected to do. Therefore, the word "court" used in Section 20 of the ARBITRATION ACT, 1940 includes a Registrar discharging his duties under the Act. The decisio