MOOKERJEE, J. ( 1 ) NATIONAL Agricultural Co-operative Maketing Federation of india Ltd. , is a Co-operative Society which had been registered in the State of maharashtra under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925. The object of the opposite party No. 1 Society are not confined to State of Maharashtra in which the Society was incorporated. The object of the said Society extends inter alia to this State and it has its branch office at 20, British India Street, Calcutta. Accordingly, the provisions of the Multi Unit Co-operative Societies Act, 1942 apply in matters of incorporation, regulation and winding up of the opposite party No. 1-Society, whose objects are not confined to one State. ( 2 ) THE petitioner had previously instituted Money Suit No. 468 of 19/9 in the City Civil Court at Calcutta against the opposite party-Society for recovery of a sum of Rs. 15,129. 50 P. inter alia on the allegations that the petitioner had placed orders with the opposite party for supply of mustard seeds and had advanced moneys. After adjustment of accounts a sum of Rs. 11,124. 63 P. had become due and payable to the petitioner and the opposite party had failed and neglected to pay. The learned Judge 6th Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta by his order No. 16, dated 17th June, 1983 dismissed the said Money Suit No. 468 of 1979 upon the finding that as no notice under Section 70 of the Bombay Co-operative societies Act, 1925 was served upon the Registrar of Co-operative societies the said suit was not maintainable. Thereafter, on the prayer of the petitioner made under Section 86 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1973 a reference was made to the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, central Zone, Government of West Bengal for adjudication of the dispute relating to the above claim of the petitioner against the opposite party-Society. The deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Central Zone overruled the claim of the opposite party that it being a Society registered under the Bombay Co-operative societies Act, 1925 the reference under Section 86 of the West Bengal Co-operative societies Act, 1973 was invalid and the dispute case was not maintainable in law. The Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Central Zone, government of West Bengal awarded a sum of Rs. 11,124. 63 P. in favour of the petitioner with interest at the rate of 5-1/2%. The Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Central Zone, government of West Bengal awarded a sum of Rs. 11,124. 63 P. in favour of the petitioner with interest at the rate of 5-1/2%. ( 3 ) THE Member, West Bengal Co-operative Tribunal by the award impugned in the Revisional Application allowed the appeal preferred by the opposite party and set aside the award passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative societies, Central Zone, West Bengal as Arbitrator under Section 86 of the west Bengal Co-operative Act. The Member of the West Bengal Co-operative tribunal has held that the dispute petition under Section 86 of the West Bengal act filed by the petitioner was not maintainable and the petitioner was also bound by the order dated 17th June, 1983 of the City Civil Court at Calcutta dismissing the petitioner's Money Suit No. 468 of 1979. ( 4 ) IN our view, the learned Member, West Bengal Co-operative Tribunal has committed error apparent on the face of the record holding that the dispute case under Section 86 of the West Bengal Co-operative Act filed by the petitioner was not maintainable in law. The order No. 16 dated 17th June, 1983 passed by the learned Judge, 6th Bench, City Civil Court, Calcutta did not become operative as res judicata because the issues raised and decided by the Arbitrator in the reference under Section 86 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act were not directly and substantially in issue in the said Money Suit No. 468 of 1979. Upon the finding that in the absence of the service of notice under Section 70 of the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925 the Money Suit was not maintainable, the learned Judge, 6th Bench, City Civil Court had dismissed it. The learned Judge did not expressly or by implication decide any of the issues which were referred under Section 86 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act 1973 for adjudication. It was neither raised nor expressly or by implication decided whether it would be liable to make any reference under Sectioa 86 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act of the dispute between the parties. ( 5 ) IT is settled law that while finding or decision would be res judicata in a subsequent suit between the same parties the reason on which such rinding or decision are based are not res judicata. ( 5 ) IT is settled law that while finding or decision would be res judicata in a subsequent suit between the same parties the reason on which such rinding or decision are based are not res judicata. [vide Mysore State Electricity Board v. Bangalore Woollen, Cotton and Silk Mills Ltd. , AIR 1963 SC 1128 . See also profulla Chandra v. Prabartak Trust, AIR 1954 Cal. 8 ; Rupeswari Den v. M/s lokenath Hosiery Mills, AIR 1962 Cal. 608 at 610]. In the absence of identity of the issues between the previous money suit and the present dispute under section 86 of the West Bengal Act the principle of res judicata was totally inapplicable. ( 6 ) THE opposite party-Society was, no doubt, registered under the Bombay co-operative Societies Act, 1925. Bat its objects were not confined to Bombay. We have already pointed out that it is a case of both parties that the Multi Unit co-operative Societies Act, 1942 applied to the opposite party-Society. Therefore, under Section 3 (1) of the said Act (6 of 1942) for the purpose of registration it shall be deemed to be situate wholly in the State in which its principal place of business was situated. But the Society must be also deemed to be registered in other States to which the opposite party's objects extend save and except for the purposes of registration, control and dissolution. Thus, the Multi Unit society became subject to Co-operative Law of the State in which its object extends except in three matters, namely, registration, control and dissolution. A reference under Section 86 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act does not fall under any of the said three heads, registration, control and dissolution. Therefore, in furtherance of its object when the opposite party carries on business in the State of West Bengal, it must be deemed to be governed by the West bengal Co-operative Societies Act except in respect of the aforesaid three matters specified in sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Multi Unit Co-operative Societies act, 1942. ( 7 ) THE above point is practically concluded by the Supreme Court in the case of the Shamrao B. Vithal Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Kasargode Panduranga mallya [ air 1972 SC 1248 ]. In this fairness, Mr. ( 7 ) THE above point is practically concluded by the Supreme Court in the case of the Shamrao B. Vithal Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Kasargode Panduranga mallya [ air 1972 SC 1248 ]. In this fairness, Mr. Roy Choudhuty, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the opposite party Society, himself had drawn our attention to the said decision of the Supreme Court. In the said reported case the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Kerala High Court that an award obtained under Section 54 of the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925 in respect of a dispute relating to the Mangalore Branch of a Co-operative bank which was a Multi Unit Society registered at Bombay was null and void. Such dispute between the said Multi Unit Co-operative Society and the respondent before the Supreme Court normally ought to have been adjudicated upon by the Registrar appointed under the Madras Co-operative Societies Act inasmuch as the relevant time Mangalore was situated with the Madras State. The Supreme court in the said reported case interpreted the expression 'control' appearing in section 3 (1) of the Multi Unit Co-operative Societies Act and held that the said expression did not include adjudication of disputes and, therefore, the Registrar of the State in which a Multi Unit Co-operative Society is registered has 00 jurisdiction to adjudicate on dispute arising out of dealings of such Multi Unit society through its Branch in other State. ( 8 ) THE decision of the Division Bench in the case of M/s National Agricultural co-operative Marketing Federation Ltd. v. Govind Prosad Manodia [ air 1974 Cal. 399 ] is inapplicable to the facts of the present case. The Division bench held that a suit brought against the present opposite party in the City civil Court was not maintainable in the absence of a notice under Section 70 of the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925. The observations of the division Bench in the said case relating to the scope and effect of Section 3 of the Multi Unit Co-operative Societies Act must be held to be percurium inasmuch as the interpretation of Section 3 was not at all necessary for deciding the question before the Division Bench. The observations of the division Bench in the said case relating to the scope and effect of Section 3 of the Multi Unit Co-operative Societies Act must be held to be percurium inasmuch as the interpretation of Section 3 was not at all necessary for deciding the question before the Division Bench. The Division Bench had no occasion to consider whether in respect of the dealings of a Multi Unit Co-operative society in West Bengal, a reference under Section 86 of the West Bengal Co-operative societies Act would be valid. However, with respect we are unable to subscribe to the view that the deeming provision of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Multi Unit Co-operative society Act,1925 must be given a restrictive meaning because of the objects, and reasons for enacting the said act. Neither objects and reasons nor the preamble of the Act can curtail the normal meaning of the cleat language used in sub-section (1) of Section 3 subjecting a Multi Unit Co-operative Society to the Co-operative Law of the state to which it objects extend except in respect of three matters specified in said sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Act. In view of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Shamrao Vithal Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Kasargode panduranga Mallya (supra) it is not necessary, for us to make any reference to a larger Bench. The attention of the Division Bench which decided the case reported in AIR 1974 Cal. 399 , was not presumably drawn to the said pronouncement of the Supreme Court. ( 9 ) WE accordingly allow this Revisional Application, set aside the order complained of. The reference made under Section 86 of the West Bengal co-operative Societies Act, 1973 was valid. We remit the case back to the west Bengal Co-operative Tribunal for adjudication of remaining points,it any, in the appeal preferred by the opposite party. The Member of the Tribunal will proceed to again dispose of on merit the said appeal. There will be no order as to costs. S. Chatterjee, J.- I agree. Application allowed.