[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Adarsh Credit Cooperative Society Ltd ... vs Anant Dubey on 8 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:27461
1 WA-1075-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA,
CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VINAY SARAF
ON THE 8 th OF APRIL, 2026
WRIT APPEAL No. 1075 of 2026
ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD (UNDER
LIQUIDATION) AND OTHERS
Versus
ANANT DUBEY AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Sunil Jain - Additional Solicitor General with Shri Piyush Bhatnagar -
Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Akash Choudhury - Advocate for respondents No.1 & 2.
Dr. S.S. Chouhan - Government Advocate for the respondent No.3/State.
ORDER
Per: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva, Chief Justice
Appellant No.1 Society acting through the Official Liquidator,
impugns order dated 01.09.2020 passed in W.P. No.9684/2020 whereby a
direction has been issued to the Official Liquidator to conclude the
liquidation proceedings within a period of three months.
2. Learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the appellants
submits that the Official Liquidator was not put to notice when the said order
was passed. He further submits that assets of the Society are embroiled in
various litigations and attachment proceedings inter alia by the Tax
Authorities, Serious Fraud Investigation Office and PMLA and till the time
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:27461
2 WA-1075-2026
the assets are available, liquidation proceedings cannot be proceeded. He
submits that the respondents No.1 and 2 initiated proceedings under the
Contempt of Court for alleged violation of the order of the Court. He
submits that there is no willful default on the part of the Officer Liquidator
and the Officer Liquidator is constrained in view of the fact that no
unattached assets is available for proceedings further in the liquidation
proceedings. He assures that as and when unencumbered assets are
available, steps for liquidation of the Society shall be taken expeditiously.
3. Learned Additional Solicitor General submits that since the
appellants were not put to notice by the Court prior to passing the order, the
appeal could not be preferred in time. He further submits that the appeal has
been preferred in view of the fact that the respondents have initiated the
contempt proceedings and direction has been issued to immediately comply
with the impugned order and undertake liquidation proceedings.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2 submits that the
respondents are only concerned about protecting their interest and the money
invested with the Society. He submits that the respondents are not really
interested in prosecuting the contempt for punishing any particular individual
but was only interested in protecting their interest. He further submits that
respondents No.1 & 2 would be satisfied in case the claim of the respondents
which has already been lodged with the Official Liquidator is considered in
accordance with law by the Official Liquidator as and when the liquidation
proceedings commence after the assets are unencumbered. He further
submits that he does not wish to press the contempt petition and seeks leave
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:27461
3 WA-1075-2026
to withdraw the same reserving the right of the respondents to initiate fresh
proceedings in case the liquidation proceedings are not commenced as per
the assurance given to the Court.
5. In view of the above, I.A. No.6424/2026, an application seeking
condonation of delay is allowed.
6. The appeal is also disposed of with the clarification of the order
dated 01.09.2020 that the Official Liquidator shall commence and conclude
the liquidation proceedings in respect of the appellant-Society as
expeditiously as possible when the assets of the Society are available to the
Official Liquidator. The claim of the respondents shall also be considered as
per the preference of the category to which the claimants/respondents belong
in accordance with law.
7. Further, in view of the statement made by learned counsel for the
respondents, the contempt petition being Conc No.2076/2020 is also
dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.
8. Appeal stands disposed of.
(SANJEEV SACHDEVA) (VINAY SARAF)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
YS
