Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
KISHORE C. SANT, J
Manish Ishwarlal Jain – Appellant
Versus
Jalgaon Zilla Madhyavarti Sahakari Bank Limiated, through its Manager – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties.
2. The petitioners before this court are the persons who executed security bonds for the loan advanced to respondent No.2 Society by respondent No.1 bank. Respondent No.1 is the District Central Cooperative Bank. Respondent No.2 is the Society under the Cooperative Societies Act. Respondent No.3 is also one of the guarantors who has filed writ petition No.5117/2020. The present petitioners are respondent No.3 to 11 in the writ petition No.5117/2020 filed by the respondent No.3. Since both the petitions are filed challenging the same judgment and order passed by the learned Cooperative appellate court. [Respondent No.1 hereinafter referred to as ‘Bank’ and Respondent No.2 hereinafter referred to as the ‘Society’ for the purpose of convenience.]
3. The petitioners are aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 24-09-2021 passed in Appeal No. 42/2019 and Appeal No. 53/2019. The appeal No. 42/2019 was filed by the petitioners in WP/13219/2019 whereas the appeal No. 53/2019 was filed by petitioner in WP/5117/2020.
4. The facts giving rise to the present petitions are as below.
5. That the petitioners executed the Gu
The court confirmed that guarantors are liable under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, and disputes against them are maintainable despite limitation challenges.
High Court cannot in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can direct the bank to positively consider the benefit of one time settlement to writ petitioner.
The court clarified that statutory bar under Order VII Rule 11(d) requires clear prohibition for dismissal, emphasizing the distinction between jurisdiction and maintainability.
Disputes between cooperative societies and their employees are not maintainable under Section 91 of the MCS Act, requiring civil suits for resolution.
The jurisdiction to hear cooperative disputes lies with the Cooperative Court when the matters directly impact the society's business and management.
Failure to apply for defense in a summary suit under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act results in acceptance of the claims made by the plaintiff.
The court established that under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, a cooperative society is obligated to accept all qualified membership applications, and any disputes regarding membership m....
The court established that authorization to file a dispute under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act does not require strict adherence to procedural formalities, and that defects in authorizat....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
