Bombay High Court
Dattaprasad Ramvilas Sikchi vs Union Of India Through Its Secretary And ... on 27 October, 2025
WP (STAMP) 32533 OF 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 32533 OF 2025
DATTAPRASAD RAMVILAS SIKCHI
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
...
• Mr. R. D. Thorat, Advocate for the Petitioner
• Mr. N. T. Tribhuwan, Advocate for Respondent No. 1
...
CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
(VACATION COURT)
DATED : 27th OCTOBER, 2025
PER COURT :
1. Mr. Thorat, the learned advocate for the petitioner
would submit that the petitioner is borrower of respondent Nos. 2
and 3 - Bank, having secured cash credit facilities worth Rs.
3,00,000/-, he would submit that the said cash credit facility was
advanced by respondent No. 3 - Bank vide sanctioned letter dated
25.08.2014. It seems that in the course of time the petitioner became
defaulter and respondent No. 3 - Bank took up the issue before
learned Arbitral Tribunal comprising of sole arbitrator. The claim was
for Rs. 3,54,254/-. It further appears that learned sole arbitrator by
its judgment and award dated 12.06.2019, allowed the arbitration
appeal and permitted recovery from the petitioner in tune of
WP (STAMP) 32533 OF 2025
Rs. 3,54,254/- with interest at the rate of 19% per annum with effect
from 01.07.2017 till recovery of the amount.
2. It further appears that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 - Bank
issued a demand notice under Section 37(3) of the Multi-State
Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 (for short "MSCS Act") on
15.09.2025. The notice contained details of the arbitration
proceedings and the exact due i.e. Rs. 8,42,393/- which carried
interest till 31.08.2025. On 30.09.2025, the petitioner replied the
notice through his learned advocate. The petitioner denied the
contents of notice and prayed to give him opportunity of hearing. It
appears that on 03.10.2025, respondent No. 2 issued a notice to the
petitioner under Section 97 and Rule 37(4) and (5) of the MSCS Act.
It reveals that respondent No. 2 have given notice that immovable
property of the petitioner would be attached on 28.10.2025. It is as
against the petitioner to approach this Court. Learned advocate for
the petitioner would submit that petitioner was not given any
opportunity of hearing in the arbitration proceedings. He would
submit that the petitioner categorically explained this fact to
respondent No. 1 and 3 vide their reply notice that were issued
through their learned advocate. As such Mr. Thorat, learned advocate
for the petitioner submits that the attachment procedure scheduled
WP (STAMP) 32533 OF 2025
tomorrow be stayed. It is pertinent to note, the petitioners have not
challenged yet the judgment and award passed by learned sole
Arbitrator.
3. I find in paragraph 6 of the order dated 12.06.2019,
passed by learned arbitrator that respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in the
arbitration proceedings were not properly served. Therefore, notice
was published in daily newspaper namely Dainik Sangharsh dated
05.10.2018 which below Exh. 08.
4. Issue notice, returnable on 10.11.2025. Mr. Tribhuwan,
learned advocate waives notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 -
Union of India.
5. In the meantime, if the petitioner deposits an amount of
Rs. 5,00,000/- by tomorrow i.e. 28.10.2025 in respondent No. 3 -
Bank, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 shall not take any coercive action
against the petitioner and his immovable property. In the event, if the
petitioner deposits such amount, it shall be subject to the
adjudication in between the parties as such the adjustment of the
account.
WP (STAMP) 32533 OF 2025
6. It is made clear that failure on the part of the petitioner
to deposit such amount i.e. Rs. 5,00,000/- by tomorrow, will not
prevent respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to proceed further for the recovery
process, including the attachment.
7. The issue of maintainability of writ petition taking
departure to statutory appeal against the judgment and award passed
by learned sole Arbitrator is kept open.
( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. )
