1984 PLP 944 (CLC)
LYALLPUR CENTRAL CO‑OPERATIVE BANK LTD.‑Petitioner Versus ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, CO‑OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND OTHERS — Respondents
| Citation | 1984 PLP 944 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Lone, J |
| Parties | LYALLPUR CENTRAL CO‑OPERATIVE BANK LTD.‑Petitioner Versus ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, CO‑OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND OTHERS — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1984 PLP 944 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1984 PLP 944 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Lone, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1984 PLP 944 (CLC) (LYALLPUR CENTRAL CO‑OPERATIVE BANK LTD.‑Petitioner Versus ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, CO‑OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND OTHERS — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Shahzad Jahangir for Petitioner.
- Pir Altaf Hussain for Respondent No. 1.
- Jariullah Khan for Respondent No. 3.
- Date of hearing: 15th January, 1983.
Headnotes / Summary
Co‑operative Societies Act (VII of 1925)‑ ‑‑S. 64 and Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 98‑Appeal Deputy Secretary, Co‑operative Department not competent to decide appeal‑Order passed by such officer set aside and case remanded to Secretary, Co‑operative Department for hearing afresh. JUDGMENT This judgment shall dispose of writ petitions Nos. 526 and 902, both of 1969, as common questions of law and facts are involved therein. It shall, however, remain on the file W.P. No. 526 of 1969.
2. The judgment need not be burdened with the facts constituting the background of this litigation. It would, however, suffice to observe that aggrieved by the order dated 15th May, 1968, passed by the Assistant Registrar, Co‑operative Societies, whereby he turned down the Bank's claim resting on the arbitration‑award dated 14th December, 1963 awarding it Rs.82,205.19 as principal and Rs.7,437.82 as interest, the latter preferred an appeal under section 64 of the co‑operative Societies Act, 1925.
3. The respondent Messrs Nabi Bakhsh Ali Muhammad were also aggrieved by the Assistant Registrar's order aforesaid and they too chal lenged the same through an appeal. According to them a part of their claim against the Bank was wrongly ignored.
4. Both the appeals were disposed of by Mr. If. J. Notta, Deputy Secretary, (Co‑operation) by his order dated 27th September, 1968. Writ petition No. 526 of 1969 has been brought by the Bank to assail validity of this order and whereas the other writ petition has been instituted by Messrs Nabi Bakhsh Ali Muhammad.
5. The learned counsel for both the parties agree that the appeal were to be heard by the Secretary, Co‑operation Department and the Deputy Secretary was not competent to dispose of the same. Both of them thus, urge that the impugned order suffers from jurisdictional defect and is liable to be set aside:
6. In this view of the matter, both the writ petitions are accepted the impugned order is declared to have been passed without lawful authority. The case is remanded to the learned Secretary, Co‑operation Department. The appeals filed by both the parties shall be treated as and disposed of afresh, in accordance with law.
7. The parties are left to bear their own costs. . M. Y. H. Petitions accepted.
Judgment & Decree
This judgment shall dispose of writ petitions Nos. 526 and 902, both of 1969, as common questions of law and facts are involved therein. It shall, however, remain on the file W.P. No. 526 of 1969.
2. The judgment need not be burdened with the facts constituting the background of this litigation. It would, however, suffice to observe that aggrieved by the order dated 15th May, 1968, passed by the Assistant Registrar, Co‑operative Societies, whereby he turned down the Bank's claim resting on the arbitration‑award dated 14th December, 1963 awarding it Rs.82,205.19 as principal and Rs.7,437.82 as interest, the latter preferred an appeal under section 64 of the co‑operative Societies Act, 1925.
3. The respondent Messrs Nabi Bakhsh Ali Muhammad were also aggrieved by the Assistant Registrar's order aforesaid and they too chal lenged the same through an appeal. According to them a part of their claim against the Bank was wrongly ignored.
4. Both the appeals were disposed of by Mr. If. J. Notta, Deputy Secretary, (Co‑operation) by his order dated 27th September, 1968. Writ petition No. 526 of 1969 has been brought by the Bank to assail validity of this order and whereas the other writ petition has been instituted by Messrs Nabi Bakhsh Ali Muhammad.
5. The learned counsel for both the parties agree that the appeal were to be heard by the Secretary, Co‑operation Department and the Deputy Secretary was not competent to dispose of the same. Both of them thus, urge that the impugned order suffers from jurisdictional defect and is liable to be set aside:
6. In this view of the matter, both the writ petitions are accepted the impugned order is declared to have been passed without lawful authority. The case is remanded to the learned Secretary, Co‑operation Department. The appeals filed by both the parties shall be treated as and disposed of afresh, in accordance with law.
7. The parties are left to bear their own costs. . M. Y. H. Petitions accepted.