F.M.A. 1436 of 2014. Case: Dilip Kumar Dutta Vs The Chief Executive Officer, West Bengal State Consumers' Co-operative Federation Ltd. and Ors.. High Court of Calcutta (India)
| Case Number | F.M.A. 1436 of 2014 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Soumya Majumder and Krishnendu Bera, Advs. and For Respondents: Ashit Kumar Chakraborty and Subhajit Panja, Advs. |
| Judges | Nishita Mhatre and Asha Arora, JJ. |
| Issue | Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - Order VII Rules 11, 11(d); West Bengal Co-operative Societies, Act, 1983 - Sections 102, 102(1)(d), 102(4), 2(17), 2(18), 4(25), 95, 95(2) |
| Judgement Date | May 15, 2015 |
| Court | High Court of Calcutta (India) |
Judgment:
Nishita Mhatre, J.
-
The question involved in the present appeal is whether the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is ousted when a claim for payment of money is made from a co-operative society registered under the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, for work done for and on behalf of the society. The appellant, a partnership firm, was appointed as the handling and transport contractor of the respondent co-operative society - West Bengal State Consumers' Co-operative Federation Ltd. & Ors. (hereinafter referred to as 'CONFED'). The appellant was required to lift food-grains from the godowns of the Food Corporation of India and deliver them to the godown of CONFED and thereafter to appoint retailers of ration goods. An agreement was executed between the appellant and CONFED on 27th March, 1997 which was to be valid for three years from 1st April, 1997 to 31st March, 2000. A dispute arose between the appellant and the CONFED. As the agreement was neither renewed nor were the food-grains which were stored in the plaintiffs' godown, disposed of by CONFED. The food-grains putrefied and were rendered unfit for human consumption. CONFED neither removed the rotten grain nor paid the damages or the godown rent.
-
The dispute between the CONFED and the appellant was referred for arbitration under the provisions of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). By a judgment and award dated 14th November, 2008 the arbitrator decided the dispute between the parties under Section 95(2) of the Act read with Rules 176 and 177 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Rules, 1987. Under Clause 1 of the award the CONFED and the appellant were directed to arrive at mutually agreed amounts for payment of the handling, commission and transport bills and transport rebate bills. Clause 2 provided that CONFED was not responsible for payment of the godown rent. Clause 3 directed the CONFED to pay an amount of ` 6,050/- (Rupees six thousand and fifty) to the appellant for executing job of handling and transport contractor. Clause 4 directed the CONFED to refund the security deposit of ` 1 lac kept with CONFED by way of a National Savings Certificate to the appellant.
-
The appellant and the CONFED entered into an amicable settlement on 2nd September, 2009. Under the terms of this agreement CONFED agreed to pay an amount of ` 8,00,000/- (Rupees eight lacs) as godown rent for occupying the same till 31st August, 2009 against the claim made by the appellant for ` 26,40,000/- (Rupees twenty six lacs forty thousand) on account of godown rent. CONFED agreed to realise the security deposit immediately after the agreement was executed. It further agreed to pay ` 6,050/- (Rupees six thousand fifty) towards the transportation charges for the work done by the appellant before execution of the agreement. The CONFED also agreed to pay ` 4,99,024.17 (Rupees four lacs ninety nine thousand twenty four and seventeen paisa) towards the transport rebate and commission to the appellant after getting the amount reimbursed by the Food and Supplies Department.
-
As the amounts were not forthcoming the appellant called upon CONFED to pay the total amount of ` 8,23,024.17 (Rupees eight lacs twenty three thousand twenty four and seventeen paisa) by its letter dated 12th September, 2011 in terms of the agreement executed in September, 2009. It appears that CONFED then paid off all the other amounts except the amount of `...
To continue reading
Request your trial