No suit shall be instituted against a multi state cooperative society or any of its officers in respect of any act touching the constitution, management or the business of the society until the expiration of ninety days next after notice in writing has been delivered to the Central Registrar or left at his office, stating the cause of action, the name, description and place of residence of the plaintiff and the relief which he claims, and the plaint shall contain a statement that such notice has been so delivered or left. The section provides that it is mandatory to give ninety days' no writing which has to be delivered to the Central Registrar, stating the action, before instituting any suit against a cooperative credit society No suit can be instituted before the expiry of ninety days period from of the service of notice. If any question of limitation is involved in instituted against a multi state co-operative society and if a notice is within the limitation period the period of limitation as laid down L Limitation Act under Section 15(2). Will extend the period of limited institution of a suit. It is not open to a civil court to entertain any suit multi state cooperative society without the service of notice. However, where a multi state cooperative society was in ulnae occupation of public premises and Estate Officer ordered it to vicars premises and pay arrears of rent, it was held that such proceeding center held to be vitiated by non-issuance of 90 days' notice. to Central RI under Section 101 of the 1984 Act (which corresponds to Section 115 of Act) because such proceedings are governed by procedure prescribed in Act, viz. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 19 India Hand loom Fabrics Marketing cooperative society Limited vs. Canada another, 2001(3) Kari. Lf 666]. In this case respondent no. l/purchaser filed suit against his well as the applicant bank. The bank contended that it is a multi operative bank which carries on business of banking under the Companies Act, 1949. The bank had initiated proceedings for recovery dues from the borrower. The actions of the bank were under the Act and, therefore, without first issuing notice as contemplated Section 115, a suit could not have been filed. In the circumstances it was that a suit could not have been instituted against a multi state cooperative society in respect of any act touching the business of the society giving any notice as may be prescribed under Section 115. The contend respondent plaintiff that the dispute is in fact between the responder and 2 has to be rejected since the plaintiff had specifically sought a that the notice issued by the applicant bank under Section 13(4) Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforce Security Interest Act, 2002 was illegal and not binding upon the which is an act touching the Principal Place of Business and Address of the bank Sara swat cooperative society .