Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal of District Central Co-operative Bank in Share Transfer Dispute Under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Single Judge’s Direction to Transfer Shares to Nominees of Deceased Member Upheld, Rejecting Bank’s Reliance on RBI Policy Over Statutory Mandate Under Section 30.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from the refusal of the Gondia District Central Co-operative Bank to transfer 20 shares held by deceased member Shankarlal Agrawal to his nominees, respondents 4 to 15. The deceased had nominated these family members and instructed the bank to transfer the shares after his death. Upon his death on 03.09.2005, the nominees applied for transfer, but the bank rejected the application, citing Reserve Bank of India directions to discourage individual membership and instead refunded the share value. The nominees then approached the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Nagpur, who allowed their application on 10.09.2007, though without a specific direction for share transfer. Aggrieved, both the bank and the nominees filed writ petitions. The learned Single Judge by order dated 09.06.2009 dismissed the bank’s writ petition and allowed the nominees’ petition, directing the bank to transfer the shares to the nominees in accordance with Section 30 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, and Rule 25 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961. The bank preferred this Letters Patent Appeal. The core legal issues involved the correct interpretation of Section 30 versus Section 23 of the Act concerning transfer of shares of a deceased member, the jurisdiction of the Registrar under Section 79, and the overriding effect of RBI circulars on statutory rights. The appellant bank argued that Section 30 could not be invoked without compliance with Section 23 and Rule 19, that the Registrar lacked jurisdiction under Section 79, and that the proper remedy was an appeal or revision. It relied on precedents to support its stand. The respondents contended that Section 30 is a mandatory provision dealing specifically with devolution of shares on death, that RBI administrative instructions cannot destroy substantive rights, and that the two sections operate in different spheres. The judgment excerpt provided does not include the final reasoning and decision of the Division Bench, as the text ends during the recital of facts before the court’s detailed analysis and ultimate holding.

Headnote

A) Co-operative Societies – Transfer of Shares of Deceased Member – Applicability of Section 30 vs Section 23 – Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, Sections 23, 30 – The dispute centered on whether devolution of shares of a deceased member upon his nominees is governed by Section 30, which specifically addresses transfer of interest on death, or Section 23, which deals with admission of new members. The appellant bank contended that Section 30 could not operate independently of Section 23 and Rule 19, while the respondents argued that Section 30 is a mandatory, self-contained provision for transfer on death. (Paras 6-8)

B) Co-operative Societies – Nomination and Transfer – Effect of RBI Policy on Statutory Rights – Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, Section 30 – The bank refused to transfer shares citing RBI directions discouraging individual membership of district central co-operative banks. The respondents maintained that administrative circulars cannot extinguish substantive rights conferred by statute, particularly the right of a nominee under Section 30. (Paras 6-7)

C) Co-operative Societies – Jurisdiction of Registrar – Scope of Section 79 – Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, Section 79 – The Divisional Joint Registrar allowed the application under Section 79, which the appellant challenged as without jurisdiction, asserting that the remedy against rejection of membership transfer lay in appeal under Section 23(2) or revision under Section 154. (Para 6)

D) Co-operative Societies – Appeal and Revisionary Remedies – Alternate Remedy – Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, Sections 23(2), 154 – Appellant argued that the proper forum for challenging the bank’s decision was either an appeal under Section 23(2) or a revision under Section 154, not an application under Section 79 before the Registrar. (Para 6)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the transfer of shares of a deceased member of a co-operative bank to his nominees/legal heirs is governed by Section 30 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, or Section 23 read with Rule 19; whether the Divisional Joint Registrar had jurisdiction under Section 79 to direct such transfer; and whether the bank could refuse transfer based on RBI policy directions.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Law Points

  • transfer of shares on death
  • nomination
  • Section 30 vs Section 23
  • rights of legal heirs
  • RBI policy cannot override statutory rights
  • jurisdiction of Registrar under Section 79
  • mandatory nature of Section 30
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2021 LawText (BOM) (11) 75

Letters Patent Appeal No.155 of 2011 in Writ Petition No.4302 of 2008

2021-11-17

A. S. Chandurkar, G. A. Sanap

Shri M. V. Samarth (Senior Advocate for appellant), Shri A. S. Fulzele (AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 3), Shri A. S. Jaiswal (Senior Advocate for respondent Nos. 4 to 15)

Gondia District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Gondia through the Chairman/General Manager

1. The State of Maharashtra, 2. The Commissioner for Cooperation and Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Pune, 3. Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Nagpur, 4. Smt. Rukminidevi Shankarlal Agrawal (Dead) through legal heirs (4A-4I) & Others (5 to 15)

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Dispute over refusal of a co-operative bank to transfer shares of a deceased member to his nominees, raising questions of statutory interpretation of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act and the overriding effect of RBI directions.

Remedy Sought

The respondent nominees sought a direction for transfer of shares and membership; the appellant bank sought to set aside the Registrar’s order that partially allowed the nominees’ application.

Filing Reason

The bank rejected the nominees’ application for share transfer citing RBI policy to discourage individual membership; the Registrar allowed the application but without specific direction for transfer, prompting both parties to file writ petitions.

Previous Decisions

Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Nagpur allowed the nominees’ application on 10.09.2007; Learned Single Judge on 09.06.2009 dismissed the bank’s writ petition and allowed the nominees’ petition, directing share transfer under Section 30 and Rule 25.

Issues

Whether the transfer of shares of a deceased member to his nominees is governed by Section 30 or Section 23 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Whether the Divisional Joint Registrar had jurisdiction under Section 79 to entertain the application and direct share transfer. Whether the bank could refuse transfer based on RBI circulars despite the statutory mandate of Section 30. Whether the proper remedy for the nominees was an appeal under Section 23(2) or revision under Section 154, rather than an application under Section 79.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant: Application not maintainable under Section 30 without compliance with Section 23 and Rule 19; Registrar lacked jurisdiction under Section 79; proper remedy was appeal under Section 23(2) or revision under Section 154; RBI policy justified refund of share value instead of transfer. Respondents: Section 30 is mandatory and applies exclusively to transfer on death; Sections 23 and 30 operate in different domains; RBI administrative instructions cannot override statutory rights; bye-law 9(B) provides remedy before Registrar.

Judgment Excerpts

The respondent Nos. 4 to 15, after his death made an application to the Chairman of the appellant-Bank for transfer of the shares to their names, in view of the family arrangement arrived at between them. The appellant-Bank relying upon the instructions mentioned in the letter dated 05.07.2000 refused to transfer the shares in the name of the respondent Nos. 4 to 15 by passing the resolution to that effect.

Procedural History

Deceased Shankarlal Agrawal held 20 shares of appellant bank and nominated respondents 4-15. He died on 03.09.2005. Nominees applied for transfer; bank rejected on RBI policy grounds and refunded share value. Nominees approached Divisional Joint Registrar under Section 30; Registrar allowed application on 10.09.2007 but without specific direction. Bank filed W.P. No.4302/2008, nominees filed W.P. No.3088/2008. Learned Single Judge by order dated 09.06.2009 dismissed bank’s petition, allowed nominees’ petition, and directed share transfer under Section 30 and Rule 25. Bank preferred L.P.A. No.155/2011.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960: Section 23, Section 30, Section 79, Section 154
  • Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961: Rule 19, Rule 25
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal of District Central Co-operative Bank in Share Transfer Dispute Under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Single Judge’s Direction to Transfer Shares to Nominees of Deceased Member Upheld, Rejecting Bank...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Grants Bail to Accused in NDPS Case Due to Non-Compliance with Section 50 of NDPS Act and Lack of Recovery from Accused. The court held that the mandatory requirements of Section 50 of NDPS Act were not complied with as the pe...