HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR
JANAKALYAN SAHAKARI BANK LTD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRTORY AND ORS – Respondent
WP/5354/2025
AGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5354 OF 2025 Janakalyan Sahakari Bank Limited, a Cooperative Bank, having its office at Vivek Darsha, 140, Sindhi Society, Opp. Bhakti Bhavan, Chembur, ATUL Mumbai 400 071. … Petitioner GANESH KULKARNI V/s.
Digitally signed by ATUL GANESH KULKARNI Date: 2025.11.13
14:51:38 +0530 1. State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Ministry of Cooperation, Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. The District Deputy Registrar (2), Cooperative Societies, Eastern Suburb, Mumbai, office No.2, 2nd Floor, Navi Mumbai 400 614
3. The Commissioner of Cooperation &
Registrar, Cooperative Societies, State of Maharashtra, Pune, New Central Building, 2nd Floor, Pune 411 001.
4. Dr. Anil Vinayak Damle, Aged 63 years, 5. Sachin Vinayak Damle, Age 53 years, both r/at Madhuban Building, 516, H.R. Mahajani Road, Matunga (East), Mumbai 400 019
6. Avishkar Developers, through Mr. Vijay Ramesh Vaidya, Office at 501,Raj Anant, Vijay Majrekar Road, Portuguese Church, Dadar, Mumbai 400 028
7. APT Infratech Solutions LLP, (partner – Rohan Vijay Vaidya &
Milind Madhav Gokhale), G1, Avishkar Empress, K.W. Chitale Path, Dadar (West), Mumbai 400 028
8. Rohan Vijay Vaidya, 801, Avishkar Empress, K.W. Chitale Path, Dadar (West), Mumbai 400 028
9. Milind Madhav Gokhale, Kelkar Building, Brahmin Society, Nr. Post Office, Naupada, Thane (west) 400 602. 10. Smita Vijay Vaidya, 801, Avishkar Empress, K.W. Chitale Path, Dadar (West) Mumbai 400 028
11. Vijay Ramesh Vaidya, 801, Avishkar Empress, K.W. Chitale Path, Dadar (West), Mumbai 400 028 … Respondents Mr. Atul Damle, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. Omkar Warange for the petitioner.
Ms. Savina Crasto, AGP for the respondents-State.
Mr. Girish S. Godbole, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. Sachin J. Kadam and Mr. Siddharth R. Khedekar, for respondent Nos.4, and 5.
Mr. Aseem Naphade with Ms. Lubna Shaikh, Mr. Utkarsh Pawar i/by S.K. Legal Associates LLP for respondent Nos.6, 7, 8, 10, and 11.
CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J.
RESERVED ON : OCTOBER 14, 2025 PRONOUNCED ON : OCTOBER 15, 2025 JUDGMENT:
1. By the present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-Bank challenges legality and validity of the Judgment and Order dated 21 January 2025 passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies-2, Mumbai in Revision Application No.190 of 2024 filed by respondent Nos.4 and 5 setting aside order dated 18 May 2024 passed by the Special Recovery Officer in exercise of powers under Rule 107(19) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Rules, 1961 (“MCS Rules”).
2. This writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner–Bank challenges the legality and correctness of the Judgment and Order dated 21 January 2025 passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies–2, Mumbai in Revision Application No. 190 of 2024 filed by respondent Nos. 4 and 5. By the said judgment, the Revisional Authority set aside the order dated 18 May 2024 passed by the Special Recovery Officer under Rule 107(19) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Rules, 1961.
3. The facts giving rise to the petition are these. On 18 October 2011, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 executed a registered Development Agreement with respondent No. 6 for a total consideration of Rs. 1,13,00,000 to be paid in the manner prescribed in clause 11 of the agreement. Clause 12 of the agreement conferred on respondent Nos. 4 and 5 (developers) the right to sell and dispose of the units, tenements, and other components of the proposed development on such terms, conditions, and prices as they deemed fit. The developers were authorized to execute all necessary documents for the sale and to receive and retain the consideration as their own. Clause 13 granted to the developers an irrevocable licence of ingress, egress, and regress to the property for carrying out development work as agreed.
4. The petitioner–Bank had extended cash credit facilities to respondent No. 7 throug
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.