Mr.Rajiv Singh, Sole Proprietor of M/s. Indra Exports v. Raghuvanshi Coop. Bank Ltd & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 11. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner states that in view of the alternate remedy under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw this petition to avail of the aforesaid remedy. The learned counsel…
Judgment
Mr.Rajiv Singh, Sole Proprietor of M/s. Indra Exports ...Petitioner Versus Raghuvanshi Coop. Bank Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Yatin R. Shah for petitioner Mrs. Iman Culcuttawala, Asstt. G.P. for respondent nos.2 and 3 CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. DATE : 25TH JULY, 2006. P.C.:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner states that in view of the alternate remedy under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw this petition to avail of the aforesaid remedy. The learned counsel further submits that in view of the pendency of this proceeding a direction may be issued by this Court to the effect that if a Revision is filed within four weeks from today, the Revisional Authority should hear the : 2 : revision on merits. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of as not pressed with liberty to the petitioner to move the Revisional Authority under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.
In the event the Revision is filed within a period of four weeks from today, the Revisional Authority shall deal with it and dispose of the same subject to due compliance of Section 154(2A) of the Act without regard to the bar of limitation.
In order to enable the petitioner to take necessary steps in accordance with law, the ad interim order dated 25.1.2003 shall continue to remain in force for a period of four weeks from today.
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 — s. 154.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 25 Jul 2006. The bench was D Y CHANDRACHUD.
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.