W.P. (C) No.1588/2022 Page 1 of 8

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Judgment reserved on: March 20, 2023

Judgment delivered on: March 28, 2023

+

W.P.(C) 1588/2022

JAIN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.

.....Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Abhinav Sharma, Mr. Ravi Singh

Chhikara and Ms. Shreesh Pathak,

Advocates.

versus

PUNEET JAIN & OTHERS

…... Respondents

Through:

Ms. Hrishika Jain, Adv. for Mr.

Shadan Farasat, ASC for R2 & R3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA

J U D G M E N T

ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.

1.

Writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner assailing the

impugned order dated October 01, 2021 passed by the Financial

Commissioner, Delhi whereby the Revision Petition filed on behalf of the

petitioner bank under Section 116 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act,

2003 (herein referred to as “the Act”) challenging an order dated July 02,

2021 passed under Section 105 of the Act in Execution Case No.158/2019-

20, was held to be non-maintainable on the ground that there is a provision

of appeal provided under Section 112 (1)(k) of the Act.

2.

The factual matrix falls in a narrow encompass.

Digitally Signed

By:DINESH CHANDRA

Signing Date:28.03.2023

17:38:34

Signature Not Verified

W.P. (C) No.1588/2022 Page 2 of 8

i.Respondent No. 1, an employee of the petitioner co-operative bank,

filed a claim petition under Section 70 of the Act, on which the

matter was referred for arbitration under Section 71 of the Act.

ii.The learned arbitrator in arbitration case No. 1673/AR/ARB/15-16

passed an award dated April 14, 2016 and the relevant portion of the

award is as follows:

“…

iii.The petitioner bank challenged the award in Appeal, but could not

succeed. Respondent No. 1 thereafter filed proceedings for execution

of the award, vide execution case No. 158/19-20.

iv.In execution proceedings, vide order dated July 02, 2021 passed

under Section 105 of the Act, Assistant Collector / Respondent No. 3,

directed the petitioner to pay the interest on arrears up to the actual

date of payment and not till the date of award i.e. April 14, 2016.

v.The aforesaid order dated July 02, 2021 passed by Assistant

Collector was challenged by the petitioner bank by way of Revision

Digitally Signed

By:DINESH CHANDRA

Signing Date:28.03.2023

17:38:34

Signature Not Verified

W.P. (C) No.1588/2022 Page 3 of 8

Petition under Section 116 of the Act before the Financial

Commissioner / Respondent No. 2. Vide impugned order dated

October 01, 2021 Financial Commissioner held that the Revision

Petition is not maintainable, since a provision for appeal has been

provided under Section 112(1)(k) of the Act. Revision Petition was

accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the

appropriate forum.

The impugned order passed by Financial Commissioner is

challenged by way of present Writ Petition.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Financial

Commissioner erred in holding that provision of appeal has been provided

under Section 112(1)(k) of the Act against the order dated July 02, 2021

passed by Assistant Collector under Section 105 of the Act. It was urged that

no such provision for appeal is provided under Section 112 of the Act and

the only remedy available to the petitioner was to approach the Financial

Commissioner by way of „Revision Petition‟ under Section 116 of the Act.

Further, the proceedings could not have been preferred in appeal before the

Tribunal under Section 114 of the Act. Reliance was further placed upon

„L.K. Bahl vs. Lt. Governor of Delhi and Ors.‟, 45 (1991) DLT 573.

4.

On the other hand the impugned order passed by the Financial

Co