✦ Bombay High Court

Writ Petition No. 5529 of 2010 · Bombay High Court

Writ Petition No. 5529 of 2010B P DHARMADHIKARI

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Heard Shri Gaoli, learned counsel for the petitioner. Revision filed by the petitioner has been dismissed for non-compliance of monetary requirement of Section 154 (2A) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. Shri Gaoli, learned counsel contends that as RRC issued by the Assistant Registrar was for time barred claim, condition of pre-deposit was not attracted. Shri Kankale, learned AGP states that the claim was not time barred and Section 154(2A) of the Act does not exempt petitioner even if claim is presumed to be time barred. Section 154(2A) requires the petitioner to deposit the amount as per RRC questioned in revision. I, therefore, do not find any jurisdictional error or perversity. Writ Petition is, therefore, rejected.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 5529 of 2010). ← Search more judgments