Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

Challenging the dismissal order of the Ld. District Forum as above, this Appeal is preferred.

The complaint case was filed by the Appellant alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Respondent No. 1 in ensuring timely clearance of the same. The said case was, however, dismissed by the Ld. District Forum holding inter alia that it lacked due jurisdiction to adjudicate the subject dispute in view of the provisions laid down under the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 2006.

Both sides were heard through their respective Ld. Advocates and documents on record carefully gone through.

Before embarking on analyzing the legality of the impugned order, let me first append below the detail provision as laid  down u/s 102 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 2006.

“102. Disputes to be filed before Registrar.-  (1) Any dispute concerning the management or business or affairs of a Co-operative society other than the dispute relating to election in a Co-operative society as and when such election is conducted by the Co-operative Election Commission and disciplinary action taken by Co-operative society against its paid employees regarding the terms and conditions of the service shall be filed before the Registrar for settlement if it arises-

(a) among members, past members and persons claiming through members and deceased members or then sureties: or

(b) between member, past member or a person claiming through a member, past member or deceased member representing through heirs or legal representatives and the Co-operative society, its board or any officer, agent or employees of the Co-operative society or liquidator, past or present; or

(c) between the Co-operative society or its board and any past board, any officer, agent or employee or any past officer, past agent; or past employee or the nominee, heirs or legal representatives of any deceased officer or deceased employee of the Co-operative society; or

(d) between two Co-operative society or between a Co-operative society and a liquidator of another Co-operative or between liquidator of two different Co-operative or between a Co-operative society and any person having transaction with it or between a Co-operative society and its financing bank.

(2) Any dispute mentioned in sub-section (1) other than a dispute relating to recovery of money shall be filed before the Registrar within three months from the date on which the cause of action arises.

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section or in any other law for the time being in force. the Registrar may admit any dispute after the expiry of the period of limitation provided in sub-section (2), if the applicant can show sufficient cause for not filing the dispute within such period of limitation and the dispute so admitted shall not be barred by limitation.

(4) Any Civil court or any consumers' Dispute Redressal Forum shall not have any jurisdiction to try any dispute as mentioned in sub-section (1),

(5) Any dispute to be filed before the Registrar shall be made in writing to be called the plaint and it shall be filed in such manner and form as may be prescribed”.

A bare reading of the above provision leaves no room for any ambiguity that if any dispute crops up between the Co-operative Society and its service providers, e.g., bank, the same need not be referred to the Registrar for settlement of the same. 

The term ‘person’ as envisaged in the 2006 Act, does not cover the service provider.  Thus, it appears that the instant case was wrongly dismissed by the Ld. District Forum.

In view of this, I am constrained to remit the case back to the Ld. District Forum for passing a reasoned order after considering the merit of the case in its true purport. 

In this connection, it is necessary to mention here that although ARCS, Birbhum was a necessary party to the case, somehow, it was left out.  There was virtually no reason for the ARCS, Birbhum to refuse issuing a duplicate cheque in lieu of the subject cheque or revalidate the same.  Be that as it may, it is directed that the said office be made a party to the case.

Accordingly, the Appeal stands allowed in part.  The impugned order is hereby set aside.  Parties to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 04-11-2019 for fresh adjudication of the case.