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

2010 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 2

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Not mentioned, Not mentioned
Manojit Nag Chowdhury v. Saptaparni Co-operative Housing Society and Another
Revisional Applications | Appeal No. 25 of 1998 | Dispute Case Nos. 44 / RCS / 1987-88 | 50 / RCS / 1987-88 | 51 / RCS / 1987-88 | 52 / RCS / 1987-88 | 53 / RCS / 1987-88 | 54 / RCS / 1987-88



Arbitrators under co-operative housing acts cannot declare title; their jurisdiction is limited to disputes over allotments, not ownership rights.

Headnote:(A) West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act - The proceedings under the Act are summary procedures restricted to determining society affairs. Arbitrators have limited jurisdiction and cannot declare title to immovable property - Disputes regarding servant room allotment are within such jurisdiction. (Paras 6, 12, 21, 25, 28)

(B) Jurisdiction - The Arbitrator can only adjudicate matters concerning disputes related to the business or affairs of a co-operative society, as defined under the Act. The issues raised were about allotment, not title. (Paras 20, 22, 23)

Facts of the case:
The appellant disputes awards concerning servant room allotments shared among members of a housing society. Disputes arose over entitlement and jurisdiction of arbitrators in the housing cooperative framework.

Findings of Court:
The Court ruled that the arbitrator acted within jurisdiction, affirming the tribunal's decision to uphold the awards under the Act.

Issues: Whether the disputes raised were valid under the statutory definition of 'disputes' concerning the co-operative society's affairs. The authority to declare title to immovable property was not within the jurisdiction of the arbitrator.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court stated that arbitrators have authority over certain disputes, excluding title determinations. The definition of disputes under the Co-operative Societies Act encompasses claims capable of civil litigation in the context of the society's affairs. (Paras 21, 22, 28)

Result: Impugned judgment affirmed.

Table of Content
1. summary of background and facts regarding the housing society and disputed servant rooms. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. arguments regarding jurisdiction and authority limitations of the arbitrator. (Para 6 , 10 , 12 , 16)
3. court's observations on statutory definitions and their implications on jurisdiction. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
4. key findings and conclusions relevant to the arbitrator’s authority and decision. (Para 23 , 25 , 28)
5. final dismissal of applications confirming earlier decisions. (Para 29)

1. The common subject - matter of challenge in these revisional applications is the impugned judgment and order dated January 17, 2003, passed by the learned members of the West Bengal Co - operative Tribunal in Appeal No. 25 of 1998, affirming the judgment and award dated April 30, 1998, passed by the learned arbitrator, in Dispute Case Nos. 44 / RCS / 1987-88, 50 / RCS / 1987-88, 51 / RCS / 1987-88, 52 / RCS / 1987-88, 53 / RCS / 1987-88 and 54 / RCS / 1987-88.
Briefly stated, the facts are as follows : -
National Co - operative Housing Society Limited, acquired certain plots of land on 58, Ballygunge Circular Road and caused construction of several multistoried buildings, comprising of several residential flats, community hall, servants' rooms, car parking space etc. Such allotments were made as far back as in the year of 1975/76. Thereafter, possession of the flats were given to the members from time to time. Of the several multistoried buildings, there is one building which has fourteen stories. In this particular building there are seven flats of each floor namely, A, B, C, D, E, F and G. There are three servant rooms in each floor - one each is marked for A type, C type and G type flats. The A type flat allottees, at the time of taking possession, took possession of the servant room also. Since 1976, they were possessing the flat along with the servant's room, so also the owners of flat "C" and flat "G".


2. Owners of flat "B" was handed over with the possession of their flats in 1976-1977, without servant's room. In 1978, the society, National Co - operative Housing Society Limited, by its circular dated 7-1-1978, indicated the area of the flats, cost of the flats and the status of the servant's room. Later on, the Administrator subjected the entire property to the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act.

3. The Society, National Co - operative Housing Society Limited, was later sub-divided into two societies, namely, Saptaparni Co - operative Housing Society Limited and Naba Kailash Co - operative Housing Society Limited, by an order contained in the Calcutta Gazette published on July 22, 1985.

4. Five allottees of "B" type flats namely, Mrs. Binita Sen, Smt. Jayasree Ghosh, Smt. Aparna Dasgupta, Smt. Reba Banerjee and Smt. Anjali Bose filed six separate dispute proceedings, being Dispute Case Nos. 50 / RCS of 1987-88, 51 / RCS of 1987-88, 52 / RCS of 1987-88, 53 / RCS of 1987-88, 54 / RCS of 1987-88 and 44 / RCS of 1987-88, which culminated in the award dated 30th April, 1998 passed by the learned arbitrator appointed under the provision of the West Bengal Co - operative Housing Societies Act. The operative portion of the award dated 30th April, 1998, reads as follows : -
"Award :
(1) The allotment of the servant room to the defendants who are allottees of A type flats is declared void.
(2) The defendants shall vacate the servant room within a period of three weeks and hand over quiet possession of the servant rooms to the defendant No. 1.
(3) The defendant No. 1 shall there upon allot the servant rooms adjacent to the flats of the plaintiffs within a period of two months after re - measurement in the same manner the defendant No. 1 has handed over servant quarter to 'C', 'F' and 'G' type flat allottees.
(4) If upon re - measurement an amount is payable by the plaintiffs to the defendant No. 1 the plaintiffs shall pay such amount to the defendant No. 1 before taking possession of the servant rooms in question.
(5) The
























































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
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