An applicant for relief must disclose all material facts candidly; failure to do so results in dismissal of their claim, emphasizing the principle of clean hands.

JUDGMENT :

SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, the petition is heard finally at the stage of admission.

2. The petitions raise an exception to the order dated 19/03/2021 rendered by the Cooperative Appellate Court, by which civil application seeking condonation of delay of six years has been rejected. Since identical issue is involved in both the petitions, as such are heard together.

3. The petitioner borrowed the loan from the respondent in the year 1998. Eventually he committed default in the year 2008. In the wake of the said default, the proceedings were presented by the respondent No.1 bearing Dispute Nos.78/2010 and 79/2010 for recovery of loan amount.

4. The disputes were filed for recovery of an amount of Rs.3,82,403/- and Rs.5,97,895/- respectively along with interest. Although notice was served upon the petitioner herein by the Cooperative Court, the petitioner – Society chose not to appear in the said proceedings resultantly no written statement was filed. Eventually, the dispute came to be allowed by the order dated 17/02/2015.

5. On the strength of the order in dispute, the execution proceedings were presented. In the execution proceedings, there were several requests made on behalf of the petitioner – Society in response to loan demand notice under Rule 107 (3) MAHARASHTRA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES RULES , 1961 (for short hereinafter “MCS Rules, 1961”) and Section 103 (11) and 98 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (for short hereinafter “MCS Act, 1960”), those were served upon the petitioner on 10/06/2016. Similarly, seizure and custody of the property was also undertaken by the authority on 29/06/2016. Coupled with these events, the custodial receipt of attached property was executed by and on behalf of the petitioner on 29/06/2016 under Rule 107 (5) (b) of the Rules, 1961. A notice of attachment of property was also issued by taking recourse to Rule 107 (5) of the MCS Rules, 1961 on 29/06/2016. Apart from the aforesaid aspect a letter was presented on behalf of the petitioner on 30/10/2017 admitting unpaid amount and arrears towards the loan along with interest pursuant to the judgment and award rendered by the Cooperative Court. The said request was on the strength of the resolution passed by the petitioner – Society vide Resolution dated 24/10/2017. Equally, a communication dated 08/07/2019 on behalf of the petitioner – Society was made thereby admitting the unpaid arrears of loan and interest.

6. Thereafter, the petitioner herein has decided to raise challenge to the order rendered by the Cooperative Court on 17/02/2015. Since there was delay in presenting the appeal before the Cooperative Appellate Court, an application for condonation of delay was presented accompanied with an appeal. Surprisingly in the application seeking condonation of delay, the aforesaid events are consciously withheld and sweeping plea is put forth in paragraph Nos.3 and 4 of the application, which is reproduced as under :-

“3. That recently on 18.02.2021, the respondent no.1 issued written notice for auction of the movable and immovable properties of the appellant society. The notice is also published in daily Deshnotti on 18.02.2021, by the respondent no.1 for the alleged auction. It is submitted that the appellant society making continuous efforts to get the accounts statement of loan from respondents, but the same is not supplied till date.

4. The Judgment, order and Award is passed on 17.02.