D. M. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

( 1 ) IN this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, preferred by the present applicant who is plaintiff in the trial Court, a pure question of jurisdiction of Civil Court has been raised which has been decided against the plaintiff by the trial Court. The learned trial Judge i. e. the District Judge, Balaghat by the impugned order dated 4-4-1995 held that the claim lodged by the plaintiff against the respondent-Co-operative Society (namely, M. P. Rajya Laghu Van Upaj Sahkari Sangh Maryadit) is exclusively referable as a dispute for decision to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies under Section 64 of the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) and the Civil Court's jurisdiction is expresslsy barred under Section 82 (1) (c) of the said Act.

( 2 ) BEFORE considering the contentions advanced on behalf of the plaintiff by the learned Counsel Shri M. M. Agrawal, Advocate, it is necessary to examine the nature of the claim laid in the civil suit. The defendant Co-operative Society issued a tender notice inviting tender for purchase and sale of Marribulam (Harra), a forest product. The plaintiff submitted his tender for a sum of Rs. 61,301 /- to obtain a right to purchase Harra. He deposited earnest money of Rs. 3200/- and bank guarantee of Rupees 12,500/ -. A formal contract was entered into between the Co-operative Society and the plaintiff on 17-1-1989. Under the terms of the contract, the plaintiff was required to purchase entire quantity of Harra collected by the society through primary societies attached to it. Under the terms of the contract, the petitioner was bound to collect Harra from the delivery centres of the society. The plaintiff's case is that in the relevant year the defendant-Co-operative Society through the co-operative societies attached to it failed to collect any quantity of Harra and, therefore, the plaintiff could not, in exercise of his right under the contract, obtain any Harra for his trading activity. According to the plaintiff, as the society failed to perform its part of the contract in making available Harra at delivery centres, the plaintiff is entitled to refund of his earnest money and the bank guarantee. On notice being sent by the plaintiff, the society refused to refund the earnest money and the bank guarantee. Instead, the society served a notice for deposit of the balance amount of instalments under the contract. This led to the filing of the suit by the plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 19,505/- and for restraining the defendants from recovering a sum of Rs. 47,490/ -.

( 3 ) ON the objection raised by the society with regard to the bar of jurisdiction of civil suit, the learned District Judge framed a preliminary issue and decided the same by holding that the claim raised in the civil suit constituted a dispute touching the business of the society and is clearly referable and exclusively determinable by the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies in terms of the provisions contained in Section 64 (1) (c) of the Act.

( 4 ) BEFORE setting out the contentions advanced by the parties and considering their merits, it would be necessary to reproduce the relevant provisions contained in Sec. 64 (1) (c) and sub-section (2) of Section 64 of the Act which read as under :"64. Disputes.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, any dispute touching the Constitution, management or business of a society or the liquidation of a society shall be referred to the Registrar by any of the parties to the dispute if the parties thereto are among the following:- (c) a person other than a member of the society who has been granted a loan by the society or with whom the society has or had business transactions and any person claiming through such a person. (2) For the purposes of sub-section (1), a dispute shall include :- (i) a claim by a society for any debt or demand due to it from a membe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document