Writ Petition No. 1439 of 2006 · Bombay High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 s. 94(3)(a)
Judgment
Heard Advocate Shri P.A.Deshmukh petitioner and Advocate Miss Bhange holding for Advocate Shri Sambre for respondent No.1. The courts below have concurrently refused to grant temporary injunction to petitioner/original plaintiff, who claims to have purchased the property mortgaged by other respondents to the Urban Co- operative Bank Ltd., Pusad, Distt.- Yavatmal. Advocate Shri Deshmukh contends that in view of Section 94(3)(a) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, the petitioner ought to have been joined as party to the proceedings before the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, for issuance of Recovery Certificate. The courts below have concurrently found that the property was already mortgaged and petitioner plaintiff has purchased said property on which respondent No.1 had its first charge. Section 94(3)(a) of the said Act speaks of proceedings before the Co-operative Court. The present petitioner ...2... has not approached the Cooperative Court. Hence, there is no perversity or jurisdictional error in the approach of both the courts below. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Pd iw al e JUDGE
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.