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

1992 Supreme(MP) 57

1992 JLJ 340
R.K. Varma and S.D. Jha, JJ.
Moolchand v. Shri N.K. Satsangi and others
M.P. No. 126 of 1989; Decided on 31.1.1992.

Advocates:
K.G. Maheshwari for petitioner; K.L. Sethi with A.K Sethi for respondent No.3; Samvatsar for respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6.

Headnote:(1) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O.8, R. 1 and O. 14, R. 2 -- objection as to jurisdiction -- should be raised in written statement -- Court may thereafter raise a preliminary issue and try the same. 1986 MPLJ N 6 relied on. [Para 23

       (2) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O. 39, Rr. 1 and 2 -- stage of issuance of interim injunction -- maintainability of suit for want of jurisdiction -- cannot be gone‘ into -- question of jurisdiction can only be decided after filing written statement. 1986 MPLJ N 6 relied on. [Paras 5 and 23

       (3) Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (M.P.) -- Ss. 82 and 64 -- civil suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction -- stage of issuance of interim injunction -- no written statement filed -- plaint cannot be returned for presentation to the proper Court -- provisions under sections 82 and 64 ousting jurisdiction of civil Court cannot be considered at that stage. 1986 MPLJ N 6 relied on. [Paras 8 and 23

       (4) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O. 7, R. 10 (1) -- return of plaint for want of jurisdiction -- cannot be ordered before filing written statement at the initial stage of hearing application for temporary injunction. 1986 MPLJ N 6 relied on. [Para 23

       ¼1½ flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && vk- 8] fu- 1 rFkk vk- 14] fu- 2 && vf/kdkfjrk ds laca/k eas vk{ksi && fyf[kr dFkuksa esa fd;k tkuk pkfg, && U;k;ky; rRi‘pkr~ izkjafHkd fook|d cuk dj ml ij fopkj dj ldrk gSA 1986 ,e ih ,y ts ,u 6 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 23À

       ¼2½ flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && vk- 39 fu- 1 rFkk 2 && varfje O;kns‘k tkjh fd, tkus dk izØe && vf/kdkfjrk ds vHkko esa okn pyk, tkus ;ksX; gksuk && fopkj ugha fd;k tk ldrk && vf/kdkfjrk dk iz‘u fyf[kr dFku Qkby fd, tkus ds i‘pkr~ gh fofuf‘pr fd;k tk ldrk gSA 1986 ,e ih ,y ts ,u 6 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 5 ,oa 23À

       ¼3½ lgdkjh lkslkbVh vf/kfu;e] 1960 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 82 rFkk 64 && gd dh ?kks"k.kk rFkk ‘kk‘or O;kns‘k ds fy, flfoy okn & varfje O;kns‘k tkjh fd, tkus dk izØe && fyf[kr dFku Qkby ugha fd;k x;k && okni= mfpr U;k;ky; dks is‘k fd, tkus ds fy, ykSVk;k ugha tk ldrk && /kkjk 82 rFkk 64 ds v/khu flfoy U;k;ky; dh vf/kdkfjrk oftZr djus okys mica/kksa ij ml izØe ij fopkj ugha fd;k tk ldrkA 1986 ,e ih ,y ts ,u 6 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 8 ,oa 23À

       ¼4½ flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && vk- 7 fu- 10¼1½ && vf/kdkfjrk ds vHkko esa okni= dh okilh && vLFkk;h O;kns‘k dk vkosnu lqus tkus ds izkjafHkd izØe ij fyf[kr dFku Qkby fd, tkus ds iwoZ vknsf‘kr ugah dh tk ldrhA 1986 ,e ih ,y ts ,u 6 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 23À

ORDER

R.K.Varma, J. -- 1. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought, inter alia, quashing of the Order (Annexure-5) dated 7-11- 87 passed by respondent No.1 Civil Judge Class II, Indore in Civil Suit No. 87/87, directing return of the plaint and the order Annexure-6 dated 4.5.1988 passed in Civil Appeal No. 68/87 by First Additional District Judge, Indore, dismissing the plaintiff's appeal against the Order (Annexure-5). By amendment of the petition, the petitioner has joined the Deputy Registrar and the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Indore in the array of respondent" and has also sought quashing of the orders dated 12.10.88 and 3.3.89 passed by them respectively and annexed to the Return of respondent No.7.

2. The facts giving rise to this petition, briefly stated, are as follows :-

The petitioner, being a member of the Indore Textile Employees Co-operative Housing Society, respondent No.3, purchased a plot No. 201 in Textile Clerk Colony, Pardeshipura, Indore from respondent No.3. The respondents No.4 to 7 designedly attempted to forcibly encroach upon the disputed plot No. 201. As such, the petitioner filed Civil Suit No. 87-A/87 on 2.2.87 for declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of plot No. 201 in the Court of Civil Judge, respondent No. 1. An application for temporary injunction was also filed and the Court directed maintenance of status quo.

3. The respondents No.3 to 6 did not file written statement and the counsel for the respondent No.3 filed an application under section 82 (1) (c) and section 64 of the M.P. Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') praying for dismissal of the suit on the contention that the controversy in the suit is a dispute within the meaning of section 64 of the Act and was required to be referred to the Registrar and as such, the Civil Court's jurisdiction was barred under section 82 (1) (c) of the Act.

4. The learned Civil Judge Class II, Indore after hearing the parties on the aforesaid application of respondent No.3 came to the conclusion that the averments made in the petitioner's plaint constituted a dispute within the meaning of section 64 of the Act, and therefore, the suit was barred, in view of section 82 of the Act. Accordingly, the learned Civil Judge allowed the application of respondent No.3 by Order dated 7.11.87 (Annexure- 5 to the petition) directing return of the plaint to the plaintiff for presentation in proper Court. Being aggrieved by the Order the petitioner filed an appeal (M.A. No. 68/87) in the Court of First Additional District Judge, Indore, but the learned lower Appellate Court concurred with the view taken by the Civil Judge and dismissed the appeal by Order dated 4.5.1988 (Annexure- 6 to the petition).

5. The petitioner then presented the plaint alongwith the application for temporary injunction before the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Indore. The learned Deputy Registrar while deciding the application for temporary injunction held that since the petitioner-plaintiff had not filed the same plaint, which was returned by the Civil Judge for presentation to proper Court, the suit was not maintainable and as such, he dismissed the application for temporary injunction as well as the suit by order dated 12.10.1988 in Case No. 1295/87 (Annexure P/4) The petitioner filed an appeal No. 88/1988 before the Joint Registrar Co-operative Societies, Indore.

6. The petitioner also filed this petition on 12.1.89. After hearing the petitioner who appeared in person, this Court directed issue of notice to the' respondents to show cause against admission. When the respondents appeared in response to the notice to show cause against the admission of this petition they in their reply filed on 2.5.89 raised a preliminary objection alleging material suppression on the part of the petitioner who suppressed the fact that a dispute as contemplated by section 64 of the Act wa
































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top