LPA No. 1282 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 1282 of 2010 Date of Decision: 01.10.2010 The Hisar National Cooperative House Building Society. ...Appellant Versus Phool Singh and others ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKUL MUDGAL, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present : Mr. Surender Singh Dalal, Advocate, for the appellant. **** MUKUL MUDGAL, C.J.(Oral) This appeal challenges the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 09.08.2010 whereby a direction has been issued to release the title deeds/legal documents to Phool Singh respondent No.1 herein and directing the appellant societies to pay the amount on behalf of Phool Singh respondent No.1 to respondent No. 3 herein within three months with liberty to recover the same from its employee Ishwar Singh (respondent No.4 in this appeal). LPA No. 1282 of 2010 [2] 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present controversy are that Phool Singh respondent No.1 had taken a loan of Rs. One lac in the year 1993-94 from respondent No. 3, namely, Haryana State Cooperative Housing Federation Ltd. through appellant No. 2 society which later on amalgamated with appellant No.1. It was the case of Phool Singh respondent No.1 in the writ petition that he had regularly paid the instalments to the appellants herein and had got receipts. It was further averred in the writ petition that upto 18.12.1998, respondent No.1 had paid the entire amount of Rs. 2,23,323/- which was due to him but later on it was found that one Ishwar Singh son of Gulab Singh an employee of Respondent no.3, committed certain mis- deeds qua which respondent No.1 raised a dispute which was referred to the arbitration of the Assistant Registrar Cooperative Societies under the provisions of the Haryana Cooperative Societies Act, 1984. The said Arbitrator gave an award on 1.4.2003 in which he had held that Ishwar Singh son of Gulab Singh would deposit the amount of Rs. 1,90, 351/- of the disputed receipts which amount was received by the society from Phool Singh respondent No.1 against receipts issued to him alongwith interest prescribed by the Haryana State Cooperative Housing Federation Ltd. and further directed that amount mentioned in the disputed receipts be deposited in the loan account of Phool Singh on which dates the receipts had been issued. It was further ordered by the Arbitrator that in case the amount was not deposited by Ishwar Singh as per his directions, the appellants society herein would have the right that after arresting him, auction his moveable and immovable property as per Rules. After the award of the Assistant LPA No. 1282 of 2010 [3] Registrar Cooperative Societies, respondent No.1 represented to the appellants and respondent No.3 that he had already succeeded in arbitration case and if any amount was still due to him, he was ready to deposit but his title deeds/legal documents be returned to him forthwith. Respondent No. 3 did not return the documents, as such a legal notice was issued to it on 26.2.2008 to return the documents. Respondent No.3 herein replied that an amount of Rs. 4,73,757/- was outstanding as on 29.2.2008 against respondent No.1 herein and as soon as that amount is deposited, the title deeds/legal documents would be released. Finding that no action was being taken as per the directions contained in the award passed by the Arbitrator by the appellants herein and respondent no.4 Ishwar Singh, respondent No.1 Phool Singh filed the writ petition No. 18696/2009 for return of the documents. The said writ petition came up for final disposal before the learned Single Judge wherein the learned Single Judge held as under:- “A perusal of the decision of the Arbitrator reveals that it was held that the amount is to be recovered from Ishwar Singh Incharge of the Society who had disbursed the loan and later received the amount from the petitioner. Since he was an employee, the employer Society could not escape the vicarious liability. The right of recovery was vested in the Society to recover the amount from its employees. Furthermore a direction was given that respondent No.2 – Society (The Hisar National Cooperative Housing Development Society Limited, Hisar) shall deposit the amount of loan in the account of Phool Singh – petitioner for which its employee had issued a receipts. It was for the Society to initiate coercive method to recover the amount from Ishwar Singh. So far as the award is concerned, the Society was given direction to deposit the amount in the account of the loanee at first instance. It is stated that a common man who obtained a loan and paid the amount to the employee of the Society had to run from pillar to LPA No. 1282 of 2010 [4] post for settling his account. Having succeeded in the litigation by passing of Award (Annexure P-1) in the year 2003, still the Society has not honoured the Award. It is stated that on the amount which was paid to Ishwar Singh still interest has also accrued and the amount has increased to manifolds and as on today the loan amount is Rs.5,64,242/-. It is a sorry state of affair that a poor person, who obtained a loan of Rs.1,00,000/- and had paid Rs.2,23,323/-, is still held liable to pay Rs.5,64,242/-. This has occurred due to non-performance of the duty on the part of the society. Thus, present writ petition is allowed. Title deeds/legal documents shall be released forthwith to the petitioner. The society shall pay the amount on behalf of the petitioner to respondent No.2 within three months with liberty to recover the same from its ex-employee Ishwar Singh.” 3. Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid order passed by the learned Single Judge, the present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellants. 4. The facts of this case disclose that the learned Single Judge has in a very felicitous manner redressed the gross miscarriage of justice due to withholding of the title deeds of respondent No.1 Phool Singh. The facts clearly disclose that the main stand of learned counsel for the appellant in support of the appeal is that the society of which Ishwar Singh was an employee had been taken over by the appellant society and therefore they were not liable for the act and conduct of Ishwar Singh. He further submitted that Ishwar Singh had stated in his statement that he was not the President or the Secretary of the Society. In our view, the gullible citizen having been duped by an employee of the society acquired by the appellants, the appellants not only acquired the assets of the society but also the liabilities of the same. The liability of erstwhile society acquired by the appellant of LPA No. 1282 of 2010 [5] which Ishwar Singh was an employee naturally fell on the appellants. Accordingly, we cannot find fault with the direction given by learned Single Judge which greatly advances the interest of justice. The learned Single Judge has given a direction to respondent No.3 to release the title deeds/legal documents to Phool Singh within three months from the date of judgment. We direct that respondent No. 3 shall ensure that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is carried out within the stipulated period granted by him, failing which no option would be left for this Court but to adopt coercive measures for seeking compliance of the order passed by the learned Single Judge. However, taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, it is made clear that it will be open for the appellant to adopt civil proceedings against Ishwar Singh for recovery of the concerned amount. With these observations, the appeal stands dismissed. (MUKUL MUDGAL) CHIEF JUSTICE (AJAY TEWARI) 01.10.2010 JUDGE 'ravinder'