( 282 )
Present-: Fisher C.J. and Garvin J.
DHARMARATNE v. WICKREME8INGHE.
433—D. C. Negombo, 1,274.
Registration of business names-—Co-operative Credit Society—Promotion,of thrift—Action to recover loan—Ordinance No. 6 of 1918, a. 9.
A Co-operative Credit Society formed for the promotion ofthrift and .mutual help among villagers need not be registered under'the provisions of the Registration of Business Names Ordinance.
^ PPEAL from a judgment of the District Judge of Negombo.
Qa/rvin, for plaintiff, appellant.
Fonseka, for defendant, respondent.
March 13, 1928. Garvin J.—
This action was brought for the purpose of recovering, for thebenefit of the members of a voluntary association, referred to in theproceedings as the Con-operative Credit Society of Tudella, two sumsof money borrowed from the funds of the Society by the defendant,,who was then its president. When the case first came up for trialan objection was taken to the action on the ground that the plaintiff,who is the treasurer, was not authorized to represent the membersof the Society. This defect has been remedied by an order undersection 16 of the Civil Procedure Code. At the second trial theclaim was again successfully resisted on the ground that the Societyhad not been registered under Ordinance No. 6 of 1918.
. It is clear from the evidence on record that this is a Society ofvillages—one hundred in number—who have formed themselvesinto an association for the promotion of thrift and for mutual help.Their subscriptions form the fund out of which loans are made tosubscribers in pecuniary difficulties. Reference has been made to arule which contemplated the making of loans to non-subscribers.Such a rule did exist “ formerly ” but is no longer a rule of theSociety and at ho time was a loan made to a non-subscriber. Theeffect of the evidence is that this is a mutual provident associationand not an association formed for the purpose of carrying on abusiness for profit. It is not and never was an unincorporate bodyof persons who have entered into partnership with each other witha view to carrying on business for profit. The objection foundedon section 9 of the Registration of Business Names Ordinance,No. 6 of 1918, cannot be sustained. ;
( 283 )
The proceedings bad to. this. caBe up to now are not a credit to the1828.
defendant, who as president of this Society, has on his own admission&
borrowed the funds contributed by the poor, villagers and who I
should have thought would have embraced the earliest opportunity „to establish his defence, if any, on the merits. The case will now go Wiokreme-back for the trial of the fourth and fifth issues and for determinationin accordance with the finding of the District Judge thereon.
He must in any event pay the costs of the last , hearing in theCourt below and of tips appeal.
Fishes C.J.—I agree.
DHARMARATNE v. WICKREMESINGHE