1971 (10) TMI 116 - SC - Indian Laws

High Court affirms Lower Court decision on jurisdiction for Cooperative Society disputes under Central vs. State law

The High Court affirmed the Lower Court's decision, stating that the appellant, a Cooperative Society registered in Bombay, was governed by the Central ... - Issues:Jurisdiction of Deputy Registrar under Bombay Act for adjudicating disputes involving multi-state cooperative societies.Analysis:The case involves an appeal against the dismissal of an execution application by the Lower Court under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925. The appellant, a Co-operative Society registered in Bombay, made a claim under the Bombay Act against a member residing in Kasaragod for a transaction in Mangalore. The dispute arose regarding the jurisdiction of the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Bombay to pass the award and execute it in Kerala. The High Court affirmed the Lower Court's decision, stating that the appellant was governed by the Central Act. The appellant contended that the word 'control' in the Central Act includes adjudication of claims, but the Court disagreed, emphasizing the distinction between control and adjudication of disputes.The Court analyzed the provisions of the Central Act, specifically Section 2, which deems a society registered in one state to be registered in another state where its objects extend. The appellant's establishment in Mangalore subjected it to the law in force in Madras Presidency. The Court rejected the argument that 'control' encompasses adjudication, stating that disputes should be adjudicated according to the law of the state where the branch operates. The appellant's reliance on a previous case was deemed irrelevant as the issues differed.Additionally, the appellant argued lack of territorial jurisdiction rather than inherent lack of jurisdiction in the Deputy Registrar under the Bombay Act. The Court disagreed, emphasizing that the Madras Act governed disputes arising from dealings in the Mangalore branch. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as the dispute could only be resolved under the provisions of the Madras Act. The judgment highlights the importance of adhering to the appropriate legal framework based on the location of the transaction and the branch involved.In conclusion, the Court upheld the decision of the Lower Court and the High Court, dismissing the appeal due to the lack of jurisdiction of the Deputy Registrar under the Bombay Act for disputes involving multi-state cooperative societies. Since no representation was made on behalf of the respondent, no costs were awarded.