Bombay High Court
M/S Unique Agro Processors ... vs Pusad Urban Co-Operative Bank ... on 13 July, 2016
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar
wp167.15.odt 1/5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.167 OF 2015
PETITIONER: M/s Unique Agro processors (India)
Ltd., post - Ridhora, Tq. Katol, Distt.
Nagpur through its Director SHRI
KHUSHAL MAHADEO GEDAM, R/o
K-16, Bharatnagar, Amravati Road,
Nagpur 440 031.
-VERSUS-
RESPONDENTS: 1. Pusad Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd.,
Gandhi Bagh Branch Nagar,
ig 2. Shri Vishal Nanaji Kondawar, R/o
Harekrishna Apartment Farm Land,
Ramdaspeth, Nagpur.
3. Shri Madhavendra S/o Virendra Roy,
R/o Swapnil Apartment, 5th Floor,
Opp. LAD College, North Ambazari
Road, Nagpur.
4. Shri Gopal Laxmanrao Kondawar,
R/o Harekrushna Apartment, Farm
Land, Ramdaspeth, Nagpur.
5. Shri Sanjay Laxmanrao Kondawar,
R/o kalyani Apartment, Ramdaspeth,
Nagpur.
6. Assistant Registrar, Co-operative
Societies, Opposite R.B.I. Staff
Quarters, Amravati Road, Nagpur.
7. Divisional Joint Registrar,
Cooperative Societies, Dhanwatay
Chamber (Annex) Sitabuldi, Nagpur.
Shri C. V. Kale, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Abhay Sambre, Advocate for respondent no.1.
Shri S. T. Madnani, Advocate for respondent no.4.
Shri D. P. Thakre, Additional Government Pleader for respondent nos.6
& 7.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
::: Uploaded on - 18/07/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 09:12:38 :::
wp167.15.odt 2/5
CORAM: A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.
DATED: 13
th JULY, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Notice on the respondent nos.6 and 7 is made
returnable forthwith. Shri D. P. Thakre, learned Additional
Government Pleader waives notice on their behalf. The petition is
heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the
parties.
ig In proceedings initiated by the respondent no.1 under
Section 101 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960
(for short, the said Act), the Assistant Registrar issued a recovery
certificate for an amount of Rs.3,22,50,353/-. The petitioner being
aggrieved by the aforesaid recovery certificate filed a revision
application under Section 154 of the said Act. However, as there
was non-compliance with the provisions of Section 154(2A) of the
said Act, the proceedings were not entertained on merits and the
revision application was filed. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has
filed the present writ petition.
3. Shri C. V. Kale, the learned Counsel for the petitioner
submitted that during pendency of the writ petition an amount of
Rs.2,40,00,000/- has been deposited on behalf of the petitioner
with the respondent No.1 - Bank. He referred to the order dated
wp167.15.odt 3/5
9-2-2015 passed in that regard. He, therefore, submitted that as
an amount in excess of 50% of the due amount as per the
recovery certificate has been deposited, the revision application
deserves to be heard on merits.
4. Shri Abhay Sambre, the learned Counsel for the
respondent no.1 states that he has yet to receive instructions with
regard to the exact amounts deposited by the petitioner. He
points out that by order dated 2-2-2015, the petitioner was
directed to file an affidavit on certain aspects of the matter. He
also relies on the reply filed on behalf of the respondent no.1.
Shri S. T. Madnani, the learned Counsel appears for the
respondent No.4. Shri D. P. Thakre, learned Additional
Government Pleader appears for the respondent nos.6 & 7.
5. Having heard the respective Counsel, I find that
against the issuance of recovery certificate under Section 101 of
the said Act, the petitioner has filed a revision petition. Though
initially the statutory deposit was not made by the petitioner,
during pendency of the proceedings an amount exceeding 50% of
the amount to be recovered is said to have been deposited with the
respondent no.1 Bank. By accepting the statement made on behalf
of the petitioner that an amount of Rs.2,40,00,000/- has been
deposited with the respondent no.1 Bank, the revision petition can
wp167.15.odt 4/5
be directed to be decided on merits as the provisions of Section
154 (2A) of the said Act are now complied with.
6. In view of aforesaid, the revision petition filed by the
petitioner shall be registered by the respondent no.7 and
entertained on merits. The copies of the affidavits filed on record
of the present writ petition shall be placed on record of the
revision petition and the respondent No.7 shall consider the same
in the light of the observations made in the order dated 2-2-2015
passed in this writ petition. If the respondent no.7 finds that the
statements made by the petitioner in the affidavit dated 9-2-2015
are false, then it would be open for the respondent no.7 to take
appropriate action in that regard in accordance with law.
The petitioner, the respondent nos.1 and 4 shall
appear before the respondent no.7 on 1-8-2016 to enable
consideration of the revision petition on merits.
The revision petition shall be decided within a period
of eight weeks from said date.
7. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms with no order
as to costs.
JUDGE
//MULEY//
wp167.15.odt 5/5
CERTIFICATE
"I certify that this Judgment/Order uploaded is a true and
correct copy of original signed Judgment/Order."
Uploaded by : Sanjay B. Muley, Uploaded on : 16-07-2016
Personal Assistant.
