Mulgirigala Co Operative Stores Society, Ltd. V. Charlis

1951 Present . Nagalingam J. and Pulle J.

MULGIRIGALA CO-OPERATIVE STORES SOCIETY,

 LTD., et al., Appellants, and CHARLIS, Respondent

S. C. 25-D. C. (Inty.) Tangalle, 587

Co-operative Societies Ordinance (Cap. 107)-Section 45-Dispute between Society and past office bearer-Compulsory of arbitration of Registrar-Amending Act No. 21 of 1949-Retrospective operation.

The provisions of the Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Act, No. 21 of 1949, compelling arbitration in a dispute between a co-operative society and a past officer are not applicable to a case instituted by the ex-officer prior to the date when the amending Act was passed.

APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court, Tangalle.

H. V. Perera, K.C., with E. R. S. R. Coomaraswamy, for the defendants appellants.

No. appearance for the plaintiff respondent.

T. S. Fernando, Crown Counsel, as amicus curiae.

Cur. adv. vult.

June 21, 1951. PULLE J.-

This is an interlocutory appeal in an action instituted on October 28, 1948, by the Manager of a Co-operative Society against the Society and its Secretary for the recovery of Rs. 1,455 on account of security deposited and arrears of salary due to him and an assistant salesman. An answer was delivered on February 25, 1949, which among other matters admitted an allegation in the plaint that the plaintiff and his assistant terminated their services on December 15, 1947. The plea was also taken that in terms of an agreement entered into by the plaintiff and the 1st defendant Society any dispute or matter of controversy between the parties should be referred to the arbitration of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and that therefore the Court had no jurisdiction to try and determine the action.

The trial was taken up on November 7, 1949, and in the meantime, that is on May 24, 1949, the Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Act, No. 21 of 1949, was passed. The point to be determined in this appeal is whether the provisions of the amending Act had the effect of ousting the jurisdiction of the Court to try the case.

Section 45 of the Co-operative Societies Ordinance (Cap. 107) provides that if any dispute, touching the business of a registered Society or its Committee, between the Society and any officer of the Society arises, such dispute shall be referred to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies for decision. In the cases of Piyadasa v. Bogallegama 1[(1948)50 N.L.R.224] and lllangakoon v. Bogallegama 3[(1948)49 N.L.R.403] it was held that the provision as to compulsory arbitration did not apply to a dispute between a Society and an office-bearer who had ceased to hold office. The plaintiff was therefore entitled as an ex-Manager of the 1st defendant Society to institute the present action to obtain the reliefs claimed by him. The effect of the amendment was that a dispute between a Co-operative Society and " any officer or employee of the Society whether past or present" had to be referred to the Registrar for decision. The question, therefore, is whether this amendment which came into operation while the trial was pending brought to an end the jurisdiction of the Court and whether the plaintiff's remedy thereupon was to submit the dispute to the compulsory arbitration of the Registrar. The learned District Judge decided in favour of the plaintiff.

At the argument in appeal the plaintiff was not represented by Counsel and we are indebted to Mr. T. S. Fernando, Senior Crown Counsel, who appeared as amicus curiae, for his assistance.

For the purpose; of this appeal it is not necessary to express a concluded opinion on the question as to whether a person desiring to enforce a claim after May 24, 1949, in a dispute which arose prior to that date is entitled to seek his remedy as the law stood prior to the amendment. The immediate question with which we are concerned is the right of a plaintiff to prosecute a pendin

Click Here to Read the rest of this document