Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

This Revision is directed against the Order dated 20-10-2016 passed by the Ld. District Forum, Alipurduar in C.C. No. 37/2015.

Short case of the Revisionist is that the complaint case was not maintainable in view of the provision laid down u/s 102 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 2006 Act’); yet, the Ld. District Forum rejected its maintainability petition; hence, this Revision.

On notice, Respondent No. 1 appeared before this Commission and contested the case through his Ld. Advocate.

Heard the Ld. Advocates of both sides, perused the material on record, including the citations referred to in this regard.

For better illustration of the matter, relevant provisions of the 2006 Act are appended below.

“According to Sec. 102(1) of the Act:

Any dispute concerning the management or business or affairs of 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 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, 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 or 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 society or between liquidator of two different Co-operative or between a Co-operative or between a Co-operative society and any person have transaction with it or between a Co-operative society and its financing bank.

Sec. 102(4) of the aforesaid Act runs as under:

(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).

Reading between the lines of aforesaid Sections of the 2006 Act makes it abundantly clear that, any disputes concerning the business of a Co-Operative Society, if it arises among members or between a Co-operative society and any person having transaction with it, shall have to be filed before the Registrar for settlement.  Further, as mentioned in sub-section (4) of Sec. 102 of the 2006 Act, Consumer Fora cannot adjudicate any dispute that falls within the realm of Sec. 102(1) of the 2006 Act.

To put things into perspective, it is now the settled position of law that if provisions of any particular Act expressly bars the jurisdiction of Consumer Forum, it cannot arrogate unto itself the right to make decisions or interfere with the subject matters falling within the exclusive domain of the said Act, let alone grant any relief to an aggrieved party.  Sec. 3 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is self-explanatory and makes an unambiguous virtue of the fact that this beneficial legislation is not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force.

The dispute revolves over non-encashment of a cheque deposited by the Respondent No. 1 at the Revisionist Bank. The nature of dispute, as it appears, was referable before the Registrar, Co-operative Society.  Thus, we have no hesitation stating that the Ld. District Forum has transgressed its jurisdiction in entertaining the application of the Respondent No.1 and also by passing the impugned interim order.

Under these circumstances, the proceedings pending before the Ld. District Forum are hereby quashed.  Revision petition is hereby allowed.  The complaint is dismissed.