LexMORINDA COOPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD. versus MORINDA COOP. SUGAR MILLS WORKERS UNION
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
MORIN DA COOPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD. A V. MORINDA COOP. SUGAR MILLS WORKERS UNION JULY I 2, 2006 [ARIJITPASAYAT ANDLOKESHWARSINGH PANTA,JJ.] B Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961-Sections 55 and 79-Suit against Cooperative Society-In respect of payment of Dearness Allowance- Notice u!s 79 not given-Trial Court held that notice was mandatory-First C Appellate as well as High Court held that the subject matter of dispute cannot be said to be touching business of society, hence notice not mandatory-On appeal, Held: Subject matter of dispute i.e. service condition of workmen cannot be said to be dispute touching business of the society- Hence notice not required. Respondent-Union filed a suit seeking declaration to the effect that members of the Union were entitled to the benefit of variable dearness allowance on the wages in addition to fixed allowance in accordance with para 317(ii) of the Third Wage Board Report. The stand of the appellant-defendant D was that the suit was not maintainable as notice u/s 79 of Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 was not issued. Trial Court held that service of notice E u/s 79 was mandatory. First appellate court reversed the judgment of the trial court on the ground that the subject matter of the suit cannot be said to be a dispute touching the business of the society. Second appeal was dismissed by High F Court upholding the order of First Appellate Court. Hence the present appeal. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: I. A dispute relating to conditions of service of the workmen employed by the society cannot be held to be a dispute touching the business of the society. The conclusions of the First Appellate Court that the subject G matter of the suit cannot be said to be a dispute touching the business of the society as affirmed by the High Court do not suffer from any infirmity to warrant interference. (478-D-E; 480-E] 473 H 474 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2006) SUPP. 3 S.C.R. A 2. The object of Section 55 of the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 is clear. If any dispute touches the constitution, management or business of any cooperative society arising between specified category of members has to be referred to arbitration. Similarly no cooperative society or its officers should be dragged to litigation before the Civil Court in respect of any act B touching the business of such a society unless notice is required to be given in writing as has been issued to the Registrar. (477-E-F( O.N. Bhatnagar v. Smt. Rukibai Narsindas and Ors., AIR (1982) SC 1097; Deccan Merchants Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Mis. Dalichand Jugraj Jain, [1969) l SCR 887 and Co-operative Central Bank Ltd. and Ors. etc. v. C Additional Industrial Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and Ors., etc. (1969) 2 sec 43, relied on. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4488 of2004. From the Judgment and Order dated 14.8.2003 of the High Court of D Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in R.S.A. No. 2930/1999. E M.C. Dhingra for the Appellants. O.P. Gogne, Mukesh Verma, Manish Shanker, Yash Pal Dhingra and Vikram for the Respondent The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Appellant calls in question legality of the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant under Section I 00 of the Code F of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short the 'Code'). The defendant - Morinda Co- operation Society Workers' Union (hereinafter referred to as the 'Union') as plaintiff filed a suit claiming dearness allowance on the wages plus fixed allowance in accordance with para 317(ii) of the Third Wage Board Report. The first appellate court reversed the judgment and decree of the trial court holding that the subject matter of the suit cannot be said to be a dispute G touching the business of the society. Accordingly the appeal was allowed. Second Appeal was filed by the defendant (present appellant) contending that the view of the trial court was justified and that of the first appellate court was not justified. The plaintiff - Union filed the suit seeking declaration to the effect that H the members of the plaintiff Union was entitled to the benefit of the Variable - MORINDA co-or. SUGAR MILLS LTD. "- MORINDA CO-OP. SUGAR MILLS WORKERS UNION [rASA VAT, J.] 4 75 Dearness Allowance (for short the 'VOA') on the basic wages plus fixed A allowance in accordance with
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.