Case Note & Summary
Background: The dispute arose from a money recovery suit filed by the respondents, who had supplied cotton bales to applicant No.1, a cooperative spinning mill registered under the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006. The applicants sought rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, invoking the jurisdictional bar under the said Act. Facts: The respondents (plaintiffs) alleged that the applicants placed orders for cotton bales and failed to pay the balance amount. They filed Special Civil Suit No. 5 of 2013 in the court at Khamgaon, Buldana. The applicants entered appearance and filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, contending that the suit was barred by the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006. Specifically, they relied on Sections 102(1)(d) and 102(4) read with Section 4(25), arguing that any dispute between a cooperative society and any person having transactions with it must be referred to the Registrar, and civil court jurisdiction was expressly ousted. The respondents opposed the application, asserting that the civil court had jurisdiction. Legal Issues: The primary legal question was whether the suit fell within the scope of Section 102(1)(d) of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006, thereby barring the civil court's jurisdiction, and whether the plaint should be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC as being barred by law. Arguments: For the applicants, counsel Shri Mohata argued that the trial court misread the provisions. He highlighted that Section 102(1)(d) covers disputes between a cooperative society and any person having transaction with it, irrespective of membership. The jurisdiction of the civil court was expressly barred by Section 102(4) and Section 145. Reliance was placed on the Special Bench decision of the Calcutta High Court in Anjan Choudhury v. Anandaneer Cooperative Registered Housing Society and others (AIR 1990 Cal 380), which interpreted pari materia provisions. The respondents, through counsel Shri Saboo, contended that the objections were matters of trial and the plaint could not be rejected at the threshold. Court's Analysis: The High Court examined the relevant provisions. Section 102(1)(d) defines 'dispute' to include disputes between a cooperative society and any person having transaction with it. Section 102(4) expressly bars civil court jurisdiction over such disputes. Section 145 further reinforces this bar. The court noted that the trial court had erroneously focused on the fact that respondents were not members, overlooking the phrase 'any person having transaction with it'. The court held that a conjoint reading of the provisions clearly indicated that the civil court had no jurisdiction. The decision in Anjan Choudhury was directly applicable, as it dealt with similar provisions and held that the civil court could not entertain such suits and the plaint must be rejected. Decision: The High Court allowed the revision, set aside the trial court's order dated 05.04.2017, and allowed the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, holding that the plaint was barred by law and liable to be rejected. The suit stood dismissed.
Headnote
A) Cooperative Law - Bar on Civil Court Jurisdiction - Section 102(1)(d) and Section 145, West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006 - Disputes between a cooperative society and any person having transaction with it are exclusively triable by the Registrar; Civil Court jurisdiction expressly barred - The trial court erroneously held that the bar did not apply because the respondents were not members, ignoring the phrase 'any person having transaction with it'. The High Court held that the plaint was barred by law and liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The revision was allowed, the impugned order set aside, and the plaint rejected. Held, that when a dispute falls within Section 102(1)(d), the civil court cannot entertain the suit. (Paras 9-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suit for recovery filed by the respondents (original plaintiffs) was barred by the provisions of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006, specifically Sections 102 and 145, and whether the plaint was liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure?
Final Decision
The revision application was allowed. The impugned order dated 05.04.2017 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Khamgaon was set aside. The application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was allowed, and the plaint in Special Civil Suit No. 5 of 2013 was rejected.
Law Points
- Disputes between a cooperative society and any person having transaction with it are exclusively triable by the Registrar under Section 102 of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act
- 2006
- Jurisdiction of Civil Court is expressly barred
- A conjoint reading of Sections 102 and 145 bars jurisdiction of Civil Court
- Plaint is liable to be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC if it is barred by law
