Shri Vikas Baburao Rane & Anr. v. Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Konkan Division, Navi Mumbai & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Civil Application No.1046 of 2012 and the same is disposed of accordingly. Minal Parab (R. G. KETKAR, J.)
Judgment
Shri Vikas Baburao Rane and another Vs. Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Konkan Division, Navi Mumbai and others ... Petitioners ... Respondents Mr. Sandesh Patil, Advocate i/b. Mr. Sameer S. Tambekar for Petitioners. Mr. R. M. Patne, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. S. M. Oak, Advocate i/b. Mr. Ambar Joshi and Mr. Prathamesh Gokhale for Respondent Nos.4-a to 4-c. Mr.K.S.Dewal with Mr. Jayesh Joshi, Advocates for Respondent No.4-d. CORAM : R. G. KETKAR, J. DATE : 10TH JULY, 2012 P.C. : Heard Mr. Patil, learned Counsel for Petitioners, Mr. Patne, learned AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Mr. Oak, learned Counsel for respondent Nos.4-a to 4-c and Mr. Dewal, learned Counsel for respondent No.4-d.
#2. Mr. Patil, upon taking instructions from Mr. Vikas B. Rane - petitioner No.1, states that after passing of the resolution in the Special General Body Meeting on 10.11.2011, petitioners have filed dispute under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 before the Co-operative Court, Thane. He, therefore, seeks permission to withdraw this petition and submits that all the contentions raised in this petition may be kept open.
#3. In view of this the petition is allowed to be withdrawn. All the contentions of the parties are expressly kept open. Petition stands disposed of as withdrawn. WP1781_12.sxw In view of the disposal of the petition, nothing survives in the
#5. Civil Application No.1046 of 2012 and the same is disposed of accordingly. Minal Parab (R. G. KETKAR, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 — s. 91.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 10 Jul 2012. The bench was R G KETKAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.