ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Ms. Mohini Bhavsar for learned advocate Mr. Bharat Jani for the petitioner.

2. By these petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 05.10.2017 passed by the Gujarat State Co-operative Tribunal in Appeals No. 258 of 2005 and 259 of 2005 confirming the judgement and award dated 09.02.2005 passed by the Board of Nominees in Lavad Case No. 789 of 2002 (Old Case No. 2405 of 1996) and Lavad Case No. 790 of 2002 (Old Case No. 2407 of 1996).

3. The issue involved in both the petitions is identical and therefore, the petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience, facts are recorded from Special Civil Application No. 8454 of 2018 as under:

3.1 The petitioner-original plaintiff is doing banking business registered as Multi State Co-operative Society registered under the provisions of the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act and deemed to be registered under the provisions of the Gujarat Co- operative Societies Act,1961 [for short ‘the Act,1961] and now deemed to be registered under the provisions of the Multi State Cooperative Societies Act,2000 [for short’the Act,2000]. Respondent No.1 is a partnership firm and is dealing in manufacturing and trading business of polyester, nylon yard.

Respondent No. 2 to 4 are its partners.

3.2 It is the case of the petitioner that the Regional Branch of the petitioner has power to grant Letter of Credit. Respondent No.1-firm made an application for issuance of irrevocable Inland Letter of Credit before the petitioner-Bank in the year 1991.

3.3 The petitioner granted Letter of Credit to the beneficiary of respondent No.1 on 20.11.1991. However, the respondent No.1-firm could not repay the payment along with interest and handling charge etc to the petitioner-Bank. Therefore, the petitioner- Bank served a notice dated 06.06.1996 through advocate upon the respondent No-1 for recovery of the outstanding dues. Thereafter, also the respondent No.-1 did not pay the dues of the petitioner-bank.

3.4 The petitioner-Bank therefore filed Lavad Case No. 789 of 2002 (Old Case No. 2405 of 1996) before the Board of Nominees Court, Ahmedabad for recovery of 8,85,032/-. The Board of Nominees framed the issue and answered the same in negative and the suit was dismissed on the ground the respondents are not members of the petitioner-Bank.

3.5 Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred Appeal No. 258 of 2005 before the Gujarat State Co-operative Tribunal [for short ‘the Tribunal’]. The Tribunal vide order dated 05.10.2017 upheld the judgement and award passed by the Board of Nominees and dismissed the appeal.

3.6 Facts of Special Civil Application No. 8455 of 2018 are similar and hence, the same are not reproduced.

4. Learned advocate Ms. Bhavsar submitted that the petitioner-Bank has advanced loan to the respondents and for that purpose, suits are filed for the recovery of the outstanding dues.

4.1 It was submitted that the Tribunal has passed the impugned orders confirming the orders passed by the Board of Nominees contrary to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 and Bombay Civil Manual in violation of the provisions of Order 41 Rules 11, 14,15 and 31 as no points of determination are framed by the Tribunal.

4.2 It was submitted that as the Tribunal has not framed the points of determination, the impugned orders are required to be quashed and the matters are required to be remanded back to the Tribunal.

4.3 It was further pointed out that the petitioner-Bank has produced the evidence to show that the respondents have made an application as partnership firm which was granted. However, both the authorities have ignored such fact.

4.4 It was submitted that both the Courts below have not appreciated that the petitioner-Bank has proved by way of oral evidence of the officer of the Bank by producing certified copy of the original application of the partnershi