9911796707
TMI Blog1968 (12) TMI 102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding the annual General Meeting. The Registrar referred the dispute for adjudication under s. 93 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, to H. V. Kulkarni, his nominee. The nominee decided the dispute on May 7, 1965 and held that Murkute and other applicants were members of the Bank. In the proceeding before the nominee certain documents including the minutes book of the Bank were produced. It is claimed by Murkute that those books were fabricated by the President and the Secretary with a view to make it appear that Murkute and other persons were never elected members of the Bank. On August 7, 1965, Murkute filed a complaint in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur, charging the President and Secretary of the Bank with committing offences under ss. 465 and 471 I.P. Code. It was alleged in the complaint that the two accused had dishonestly and fraudulently introduced a clause in Resolution No. 3 appearing in the minutes book with the intention of causing it to be believed that the clause was part of the original. Resolution passed by the Board of Directors in the meeting held on June 30, 1964, whereas it was known to them that at that meeting no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... subordinate. To determine whether the Registrar s nominee is a court, it is necessary to refer to the relevant provisions of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, relating to the functions of the nominee and the powers with which he is invested, counsel for the appellants urges that by the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act the power of the Civil Court to entertain disputes with regard to certain matters concerning cooperative societies is expressly excluded from the jurisdiction of the Civil Court, and the Registrar or his nominee is alone competent to determine those questions; thereby the Registrar and his nominee are invested with the judicial power of the State and they are on that account courts within the meaning of s. 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 2(2) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, defines arbitrator as meaning a person appointed under this Act to decide disputes referred to him by the Registrar and includes the Registrar s nominee or board of nominees. Section 91 and the following sections which occur in Ch. IX relate to disputes and arbitration. By s. 91, insofar as it is material, it is provided : (1) No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar as it is material : (1) The Registrar, or his nominee or board of nominees, hearing a dispute under the last preceding section shall hear the dispute in the manner prescribed, and shall have power to summon and enforce attendance of witnesses including the parties interested or any of them and to compel them to give evidence on oath, affirmation or affidavit and to compel the production of documents by the same means and as far as possible in the same manner, as is provided in the case of a Civil Court by the Code of Civil Procedure, -1908. (2) Except with the permission of the Registrar or his nominee or board of nominees, as the case may be, no party shall be represented at the hearing of a dispute by a legal practitioner. Sub-section (3) of S. 94 authorises the Registrar, his nominee or the board of nominees to join or substitute new parties. Section 95 authorises the Registrar or his nominee or board of nominees to pass an order of attachment and other interlocutory orders. Section 96 provides When a dispute is referred to arbitration the Registrar or his nominee or board of nominees may, after giving a reasonable opportunity to the parties to the dispute to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the term. Section 195(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure enacts that the term court includes a Civil, Revenue or Criminal Court, but does not include a Registrar or Sub-Registrar under the Indian Registration Act, 1877. The expression court is not restricted to courts, Civil, Revenue or Criminal; it includes other tribunals. The expression court is not defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure. Under s. 3 of the Indian Evidence Act Court is defined as including all Judges and Magistrates, and all persons, except arbitrators, legally authorised to take evidence . But this definition is devised for the purpose of the Evidence Act and will riot necessarily apply to the Code of Criminal Procedure. The expression Court of Justice is defined in the Indian Penal Code by s. 20 as denoting a Judge who is empowered by law to act judicially as a body, when such Judge or body of Judges is acting judicially . That again is not a definition of the expression Court as used in the Code of Criminal Procedure. The expression Court in ordinary parlance is a generic expression and in the context in which it occurs may mean a body or organization invested with power, autho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the former assessment committees, the former court of referees which was constituted under the Unemployment Insurance Acts, the blenchers of the Inns of Court when considering the conduct of one of their members, the Disciplinary Committee of the General Medical. Council when considering questions affecting the conduct of a medical man, a trade union when exercising disciplinary jurisdiction over its members, or the chief officer of a force exercising discipline over members of the force. A body required to act judicially in the sense that its proceedings must be conducted with fairness and impartiality may not therefore necessarily be regarded as a court. Counsel for the appellants however invited our -attention to a number of decisions in support of his contention that wherever there is a dispute which is required to be resolved by a body invested with power by statute and the body has to act judicially it must be regarded -as a court within the meaning of s. 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Counsel asserted that every quasi-judicial authority is a court within the meaning of s. 195 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The contention is inconsistent with a large body ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact. The jurisdiction of the nominee or board of nominees arises by reason not of investment by statute, but by appointment made by the Registrar who exercises control over the proceeding. The nominee therefore derives his authority from his appointment by the Registrar : the Registrar is entitled to withdraw his authority; and the Registrar may fix the time within which a dispute shall be disposed of : his adjudication is again called an award. The nominee is even entitled to make a provision for the expenses payable to the Registrar or to himself. It is true that the procedure of the nominee is assimilated to the procedure followed in the trial of a Civil proceeding. The nominee has the power to summon witnesses, to compel them to produce documents and he is required to hear the dispute in the manner prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure. Thereby he is required to act judicially i.e. fairly and impartially : but the obligation to act judicially will not necessarily make him a court within the meaning of S. 195 of the Code. The position of a nominee of the Registrar is analogous to that of an -arbitrator designated under a statutory arbitration to which the provisions of S. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed, or at a time at -which he knows that it was not made, signed, sealed or ,executed; or Secondly-Who, without lawful authority, dishonestly or fraudulently, by cancellation or otherwise, alters a, document in any material part thereof, after it -has been made or executed either by himself or by any other person, whether such person be living or dead at -the time of such alteration; or Thirdly Who dishonestly or fraudulently causes any person to sign, seal, execute or alter a document, -knowing that such person by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication cannot, or that by reason of deception practised upon him, he does not know the contents of the document or the nature of the alteration. Making of a false document by a person in all the three clauses must be done dishonestly or fraudulently and with the necessary intention or knowledge contemplated by the three clauses. Section 146 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, does not make any such intention as is referred to in ss. 463 and 464 I.P. Code an ingredient of the offence: it also renders a person who is merely privy to the destruction, mutilation, alteration, falsification or secreting or to the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
