Bombay High Court
Mohan Devdas Vidhale vs Subhash Mahadevrao Vidhale And ... on 1 October, 2021
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote
2-wp3847.21.odt
1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 3847 OF 2021
Mohan Devdas Vidhale
-Vs.-
Subhash Mahadevrao Vidhale, Chief Administrator and others
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.
or directions and Registrar's orders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. M.D.Modak, counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.C.S.Kaptan, Sr.Counsel a/b Mr. P.A.Kadu, counsel for
respondent No.4.
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATE : 01.10.2021
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present petition challenges the order below
Exhibit-5 dated 07/08/2021, passed by the learned
Cooperative Court, Amravati in Dispute No.26 of 2021,
whereby the relief for grant of an interim stay to the
execution, operation and implementation of the
resolution passed in the Special General Meeting held on
06/07/2021 of the respondent No.5-Society, by which
the respondent No.4 was nominated to participate in the
elections of the respondent No.6 for which voting is to be
held on 04/10/2021, has been rejected. The appeal
carried to the Cooperative Appellate Court, being Civil
Appeal No.7 of 2021, also came to be dismissed by the
judgment dated 30/09/2021.
3. Mr. Manish Modak, learned counsel for the
petitioner, submits that the meeting in which the
impugned resolution dated 06/07/2021, was passed,
itself was illegal, improper and invalid, as there was
KHUNTE
2-wp3847.21.odt
participation of the Administrative Officer therein, and as
against 362 votes permissible, 445 votes were cast in the
said Special Meeting. The learned counsel therefore,
submits that the said meeting as well as the resolution
passed therein are vitiated in law and therefore, the
resolution dated 06/07/2021, in favour of respondent
No.4, ought not to be given effect to.
4. Mr. Kaptan, learned Sr. Counsel for the
respondent No.4, submits that the direct effect of
granting the prayer for interim injunction, would result in
the respondent No.4 being prohibited from participating
in the election, voting for which is to be scheduled on
04/10/2021, which in turn would require the correction
of the final voters list. The learned senior counsel
submits that even otherwise, such an action, cannot be
permitted unless the validity of the allegations made, are
tested on the touchstone of being cross-examined, during
the course of the trial of the dispute.
5. Perusal of the application under section 95(4) of
the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, the order
dated 07/08/2021 passed by the Cooperative Court as
well as the judgment dated 30/09/2021, passed by the
Cooperative Appellate Court and the arguments
advanced, clearly indicate that disputed questions of facts
are involved. Whether persons, who were ineligible to
participate in the meeting dated 06/07/2021, were
permitted to vote in the said meeting, would be a
position, which has to be determined during the course
of the trial of the dispute and cannot be done, at the
prime facie stage, merely on the basis of allegations and
counter allegations made in the application and the
KHUNTE
2-wp3847.21.odt
replies. Unless such a contention is tested and found to
be correct, the effect of the resolution dated 06/07/2021,
cannot be stayed.
6. That being the position, I do not find any
infirmity with the order and judgment as impugned in
the present petition. They are well reasoned and do not
call for any interference. The petition is therefore
dismissed being without any merit. No costs.
JUDGE
KHUNTE
