1. By virtue of this order I am deciding two revision petitions, one filed by C.C. Bank Ltd. and another filed by Jadish Lal (Barrower), against order dated 22-1-09 passed by Registrar co operative Society J&K at Jammu. 2. C.C. Bank has challenged the impugned order on the ground that ld. Registrar has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested to him, that despite the fact arbitration petition remained pending for 10 years which caused un due hardship and financial loss to bank, no pendilite interest and future interest has been awarded. That no finding has been recorded as to why interest has not been given. 3. Jadish Lal the barrower, who was respondent before the Registrar has challenged the impugned order on the ground that court below has failed to decide legal and factual grounds taken in reply. That, petition has been decided by the trial without any legal evidence. That statement of account was not legally proved. That since new Co operative of act1989 has come in force and pending cases has not been saved in Act. 4. Facts leading to the present case are that, Jagdish Lal proper tier of M/S Bhasin Cigarette store Plot No. 214 Rehari Colony Jammu, applied for cash credit limit for 3 lacs rupees. It was sanctioned and later on it was enhanced to tune of Rs 5 lacs in the month of March 1996 vide sanction letter no. ADM/15531-32 dated 27-3-96 on the along with interest @ 17.5 % per annum. The said barrower mortgaged his property vide mortgaged deed dated 30-1-94. Beside this mortgaged deed, a deed of hypothecation, D. P. notes, letter of wavier, Letter of Continuity, promissory note, etc were also executed by Barrower. Mr Pawan Kumar (Respondent no.2) stood as guarantor. That after taking cash credit limit, barrower becomes irregular in repayment of loan amount and outstanding of Rs 8, 18,127.77 till 22-4-1999 became due. Thereafter bank served a legal notice but no repayment was made by barrower and guarantor. 5. Accordingly a petition U/s 63/64 of JK Cooperative Society Act 1960 old Act. was filed before Dy.registrar. It was returned to Registrar Cooperative Society J&K, Jammu, because amount claimed was above 50,000/-. Respondent no. 1 appeared and replied. In reply, general averments were made and it was stated that, petition is time barred and documents attached are photocopies thus not admissible. was filed before Dy.registrar. It was returned to Registrar Cooperative Society J&K, Jammu, because amount claimed was above 50,000/-. Respondent no. 1 appeared and replied. In reply, general averments were made and it was stated that, petition is time barred and documents attached are photocopies thus not admissible. Borrower admitted that, he is member of bank. Registrar Cooperative Society on 22-1-09 decided the petition and passed following orders:- "Now therefore, the petition is disposed of, with following orders/directions: 1. Respondent No. 1 shall pay the outstanding amount of Rs 8, 18,127.77 to the petitioner Bank within two months beginning from the date of issue of this order. 2. In the event of failure, the respondent Bank shall be at liberty to proceed against the property pledged as collateral security. 3. The respondent No. 2 (Guarantor) shall persuade the principal defaulter to deposit the decreed amount of Rs 8,18,127.77 within stipulated period. In the event of failure, the petitioner Bank shall proceed jointly against the respondents till the last penny of the amount outstanding is recovered. The petition is accordingly disposed of. Announced on 22-01-2009 Sd/- Registrar Cooperative Societies, J&K, Jammu 6. Bare perusal of this order it is evident that, Registrar granted only suit /petition amount and did not grant any pendilite and future interest on amount claimed. 7. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the whole aspect of the matter. 8. Under Cooperative Societies Act, Registrar and Deputy Registrar have to act as an arbitrator, whenever proceeding for recovery is brought before them. Arbitrator while dealing with such types of cases has to exercise his power according to well settled principle of law on interest and he has always to keep in mind primary objects of cooperative banks. 9. Section 160 of Cooperative Societies Act deals with Revisional power of this court. Arbitrator while dealing with such types of cases has to exercise his power according to well settled principle of law on interest and he has always to keep in mind primary objects of cooperative banks. 9. Section 160 of Cooperative Societies Act deals with Revisional power of this court. Section 160: REVISION (1) The Government or the Tribunal may call for and examine the record of any proceedings held or inspection made under this Act or the proceedings of any person vested with powers of Registrar or acting under his authority and if the Government or the Tribunal is of the opinion that any order, decision, or award or any proceedings so called for should be modified, annulled or revised, the Government or the Tribunal may make such order thereon as it may think fit: Provided that the Government or Tribunal, as the case may be, shall, before passing such order, give an opportunity of being heard to the person likely to be adversely effected by such order. (2) The Registrar, Cooperative Societies may at any time call for the record of any case pending before or disposed of by an officer of the Cooperative Department. (3) The Additional Registrar may call for the record of any case pending before or disposed of by any officer of the Cooperative Department subordinate to him. (4) If in case in which the Additional Registrar has called for the record, he is of opinion that the proceedings taken or order made should be modified or revised he shall report that case with his opinion thereon for the orders to the Registrar. (5) The Registrar may in any case called for by him, under sub-section (1) or reported to him under Sub-Section (3) pass such order as he may think fit: Provided that he should not passed order reversing or modifying any proceedings or order of a subordinate officer without giving an opportunity of being heard to the party adversely affected. As per this section, this tribunal has power to revise or modify order of registrar, when it comes to conclusion that, court below has exceeded jurisdiction or has exercised jurisdiction not vested to him. 10. While applying this principle, it is evident that court below has not properly exercised his jurisdiction, because no grounds have been mentioned for not providing pendilite and future interest on loan amount. He has not exercised jurisdiction judicially. 10. While applying this principle, it is evident that court below has not properly exercised his jurisdiction, because no grounds have been mentioned for not providing pendilite and future interest on loan amount. He has not exercised jurisdiction judicially. Barrower has swallowed bank loan, which was public money .Interest means compensation for use of money. Banks and financial institutions are run and survive on the interest gathered on loan amounts. In the bank public money lies and so no one has right to swallow the loan. Now it has become trend that, trickster and dishonest persons after availing the loan do not repay it. If such people are allowed to do so, then banks and financials institutions will be ruined and it will affect economy of country. What to talk of interest even principal amount has not been repaid by barrower. 11. In present case, it is fact that barrower has used money. So while taking guidance provided in section 34 of code of civil procedure, it is hereby ordered that loanee/barrower shall pay interest at the rate of Rs.6% p.a. on suit amount from the date of filling of petition by bank before court below, till its realization. 12. So far argument of counsel for barrower that, new act has not saved pending arbitration petition, is concerned, that argument is devoid of any merit, because section 172 (2) of new act has already taken care of this aspects. 13. In view of what has been discussed above, revision of bank is accepted and order of Registrar is modified as above. Whereas revision petition of barrower is concerned, that is dismissed. Copy of order is placed in both revision petitions.