Advocates:
['P B SHIRSATH', 'A N IRPATGIRE', '', 'R/ & SERVED']

1

1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CONTEMPT PETITION NO.101/2008.

(Smt.Indirabai Walse and Ors. Vs. Vitthal Nagari Sahakari

Bank Ltd., Laur and Anr.)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Office notes, office Memoranda of

Coram,appearances, Court’s orders

Court’s or Judge’s orders.

or directions and Registrar’s orders

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr.PB Shirsath, Advocate for petitioners;

Mr.AN Irpatgire, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

___

CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.

DATE : 25th January, 2010.

...

1) Mr.Shirsath seeks to tender rejoinder on

behalf of the petitioners to refute the

contentions relating to grant of

certification under Section 101 of the

Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act

and the consequences arising therefrom.

2) Rejoinder accepted, copy of which is

received by other side.

3) Heard.

4) The petitioners herein feel that the

order of Division Bench in Writ Petition

No.2368/2007 dated 23^rd April, 2007,

which reads as under,:

"Till further orders, no further steps

under the Sensitization Act including by

way of auction shall be taken so far as

petitioner’s properties are concerned."

is flouted by the respondent herein, the

2

Cooperative bank, as the property of the

petitioners herein is purportedly put to

auction.

5) Affidavit in reply of Shri Shivaji

Lomte, Manager and Recovery Officer of

the cooperative bank, is tendered, in

which, he has said that auction notice

dated 25.2.2008 is not issued under Rule

8 of Security Enforcement Rules and is

issued under Rule 107 of the Maharashtra

Cooperative Societies Rules, 1961 in

pursuance of the Recovery Certificate

dated 19.11.2007.

6) Mr. Shirsath for the petitioners herein

has by rejoinder informed, the land Gut

No.30/B belonging to Balasaheb s/o Eknath

Walase was mortgaged to the bank. The

property of Eknath Kundlik Walase, and

particularly the land Gut No. 2B-2

admeasuring 1 hectare and 71 R. situated

at Thorali Wadi Tq.Ahmedpur, had no

charge.

7) The challenge in the Writ Petition was in

terms of Section 31 of the Sensitization

Act.

Obviously,

the

recovery

certificate, referred by the respondent

in the affidavit and the action

contemplated, being beyond the scope of

the directions in writ petition, prima

facie, it is clear, there is no violation

or breach of the directions referred

3

above.

8) The remedies, if any, to the aggrieved

petitioners will be in terms of Section

101, sub-rule (19-A) or Section 154 of

the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act

and the Rules of 1961.

9) The Contempt Petition lacks merit, it is

dismissed.

10)Interim protection dated 27^th March,2008

is further extended up to 25^th February,

2010.

(K.U.CHANDIWAL)

JUDGE

bdv/cp101.08