Smt.Madhuben D.Vyas v. Shri.S.P.Ghorpade & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. At the request of the petitioner’s advocate, four weeks time is granted to file the revision application. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J.) (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J.) (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J.)
Judgment
Smt. Madhuben D.Vyas .. Petitioner. V/s. Shri.S.P.Ghorpade and Ors. .. Respondents. Shri. Santosh Singh for the petitioner. None for the respondent. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J DATE : 22ND JANUARY, 2007. DATE : 22ND JANUARY, 2007. DATE : 22ND JANUARY, 2007. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.:
The order impugned in this petition instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is at Exhibit-F. It is nothing but a Recovery Certificate granted u/s.101 of the Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies Act and the Recovery Officer, therefore, desires to proceed and execute the same.
It is not disputed before me that the remedy of the petitioner is to invoke the revisional jurisdiction : 2 : conferred upon the authority stipulated u/s.154 of the Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960. It is not in further dispute that this is an alternate and equally efficacious remedy in as much as all contentions raised in this petition are capable of being raised and agitated in Revision Application.
In the light of this position in law, this petition cannot be entertained. It is dismissed on account of availability of alternate remedy.
At the request of the petitioner’s advocate, four weeks time is granted to file the revision application. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J.) (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J.) (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies Act — s. 101; Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960 — s. 154.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 22 Jan 2007. The bench was S C DHARMADHIKARI.
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.