JUDGMENT:- This petition is directed against the original as well as appellate orders made by the Assistant Registrar and the Divisional Joint Registrar in the matter of direction issued purportedly to be under Section 79(1) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, directing the petitioner society to transfer a piece of plot admeasuring 1000 sq.ft. to the respondent no.4. 2. In support of the writ petition Mr. Bhambhurkar, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that Section 79(1) does not enable or clothe the Assistant Registrar with power to issue any such direction and as a matter of fact, that is the job of the court of law, and in this case, a Co-operative Court. According to him thus there is a usurption of jurisdiction by the Assistant Registrar. He then argued that respondent no.4 had already filed a dispute in the Co-operative Court in the same subject matter, but later on withdrew it because of the order passed by the Assistant Registrar. 3. Mr. Jaiswal, learned AGP for respondent State did not support the order saying that the same is without jurisdiction. 4. Per contra, Mr. Saboo, learned counsel for Respondent No.4 vehemently argued that the order can otherwise be justified on merits in the light of the facts discussed by the Assistant Registrar in his order since the money was actually paid by Respondent No.4 towards the price of the said piece of plot. Mr. Saboo, learned counsel for respondent no.4 then invited my attention to Para No.7 of the interim order made by this Court on 1st March, 2004, and stated at Bar that the respondent no.4 has filed a dispute pursuant to the liberty granted in para No.7. 5. I have gone through the impugned orders. I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties for quite some time. Section 79(1) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, reads thus: "79. 5. I have gone through the impugned orders. I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties for quite some time. Section 79(1) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, reads thus: "79. Registrar's power to enforce performance of obligations.(1) The registrar may direct any society or class of societies, to keep proper books of accounts with respect to all sums of money received and expended by the society, and the matters in respect of which the receipt and expenditure take place all sales and purchases of goods by the society, and the assets and liabilities of the society, and to furnish such statements and returns and to produce such records as he may require from time to time, and the officer or officers of the society shall be bound to comply with his order within the period specified therein." Section 91(1)(a) and (b) of the Act, reads thus:- "91. Disputes (1) Notwithstanding [anything contained] in any other law for the time being in force, any dispute touching the constitution, [election of the committee or its officers other than elections of committees or the specified societies including its officers], conduct of general meetings, management or business of a society shall be referred by any of the parties to the dispute, or by a federal society to which the society is affiliated or by a creditor of the society [to the Co-operative Court] if both the parties thereto are one Or other of the following:- (a) a society, its committee, any past committee, any past or present officer, any past or present agent, any past or present servant or nominee, heir or legal representative of any deceased officer, deceased agent or deceased servant of the society, or the Liquidator of the society [or the official Assignee of a de-registered society;] (b) a member, past member of a person claiming through a member, past member of a deceased member of society, or a society which is a member of the society [or a person who claims to be a member of the society;]" 6. It cannot be disputed that Co" operative Courts were constituted under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act as a substitute for Civil Courts to deal with the matters pertaining to the Co-operative Societies in relation to its business etc. It cannot be disputed that Co" operative Courts were constituted under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act as a substitute for Civil Courts to deal with the matters pertaining to the Co-operative Societies in relation to its business etc. Section 91 of the Act provides for the jurisdiction of the Cooperative Court and the matters which the Cooperative Court is entitled to adjudicate. The dispute regarding sale or specific performance of contract or conveyance of title is a dispute purely of civil nature and for deciding the rights of the parties in respect of a property dispute, it is a civil court which is the Court of law entitled to adjudication upon such civil rights of the parties in relation to the properties. Since the Co-operative Court has been made a substitute for Civil Courts, it is the Co-operative Court in respect of the Co-operative Societies and its members which performs the job of the Civil Court and it is that court which will have jurisdiction to decide such disputes between the parties. I therefore hold that in the present matter where the grievance of Respondent No.4 was that the petitioner society itself had passed a resolution to convey the title of the open plot to a member who is holding the adjoining plot and since the society did not comply with the said demand made by respondent no.4 for transfer of he said plot to Respondent no.4, obvious the dispute arose and the society did not agree to convey the title to Respondent No.4 for whatever reasons it had, but then it became the dispute in the matter of specific performance of contract since the resolution of society to transfer the said plot to the adjoining owner/member is a matter of agreement between the society and its member. 7. Looking to Section 79(1) of the Act, it is clear that the Registrar has been given a power or control under Section 79(1), which is purely of administrative nature. In other words, the Registrar is the authority to keep check on the activities of the society, expenditure and sales & purchase and its assets & liabilities. The submissions made by Mr. Saboo, learned counsel for respondent no.4 that his case would fall within the meaning of the term "assets and liabilities" of the society is misconceived. In other words, the Registrar is the authority to keep check on the activities of the society, expenditure and sales & purchase and its assets & liabilities. The submissions made by Mr. Saboo, learned counsel for respondent no.4 that his case would fall within the meaning of the term "assets and liabilities" of the society is misconceived. At any rate, Registrar who is an authority on administrative side or even may perform quasi judicial functions, cannot usurp the power of a civil court and the functions of the Court of law. 8. In my opinion, directing the society to transfer a plot to its member after making adjudication is a function of the Civil Court and in this case, of a Co-operative Court. The impugned orders made by the Assistant Registrar and the revisional order are therefore clearly without jurisdiction. In the result, I make the following order. 9. Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 20-08-2001 passed by Taluka Deputy Registrar as well as order dated 25-02-2002 passed by Divisional Sub Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Amravati, are quashed and set aside. No order as to costs. Petition allowed.