*1* wp.550.11.926.sxw kps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.550 OF 2011 J.A. Salian. ..Petitioner -Versus- Shimpoli Niranjan Coop. Hsg. Society and others. ..Respondents .......... Mr.Nil Pungalia i/b Ms.Kavita Anchan, for the Petitioner. Mr.Chaitanya M. Jadhav i/b Mahesh Menon & Company, for the Respondent No.1. .......... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. Date : 21st June, 2011. P.C.: 1 This Writ Petition is directed against the order of issuance of recovery certificate at the instance of the Respondent No.1-Co-operative Housing Society. The arrears of dues have been notified and that is how the Assistant Registrar proceeded to issue the recovery certificate under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. 2 The Petitioner, while opposing the grant of recovery certificate, has contended that Mogaveera Co-operative Bank has sought to recover certain dues which are not at all attributable to the acts of the Petitioner. Some of the members of the Respondent No.1-Society in order to obtain financial assistance mortgaged their individual flats and defaulted in payment of the loan and for their dues, the Respondent No.1- Society is not liable. Therefore, there was no reason for applying for issuance of the recovery certificate. In such circumstances and when real purpose and object in seeking such recovery certificate has not been set *2* wp.550.11.926.sxw out and is suppressed, the order issuing the recovery certificate is illegal. 3 I am unable to accept any of these contentions for one or more reasons. The Petitioner does not dispute that he is member of the Respondent No.1-Society and that he is in possession of Flat No.G-301. The Respondent No.1-Society is governed by the Maharashtra Co- operative Societies Act, 1960 and therefore, Section 101 thereof is applicable since it is a co-operative housing society. The Society faced certain legal proceedings at the instance of the Mogaveera Co-operative Bank. That proceedings were to recover certain amount due to the Bank. During the course of the proceedings, the consent terms were arrived at between the Society and Bank and the Society agreed to repay the amount borrowed from the Bank. Therefore, the general body meeting was convened and the resolution was passed on 07.10.2001 wherein it was decided that the members will contribute so that the Bank’s dues can be repaid by the Society. The Petitioner did not pay contribution and therefore, the proceedings under Section 101 were initiated. The recovery certificate granted by the Assistant Registrar is confirmed in appeal by the Joint Registrar. 4 It is clear that the recovery was of the dues of the co- operative housing society. It is immaterial for the purpose of the present proceedings as to whether, the Petitioner was indebted individually to the said Mogaveera Bank. Admittedly, the resolution dated 07.10.2001 has not been challenged by the Petitioner. The Petitioner in these proceedings cannot challenge that resolution and question the acts of the Society and his remedy lies elsewhere if the Petitioner desires to do so. In the instant proceedings, when the amount is due and payable under the consent terms and there are resolutions, so also, the demand on the Petitioner being admitted, the recovery certificate could have been issued. *3* wp.550.11.926.sxw 5 In such circumstances, there is no reason to interfere with the concurrent orders as they do not suffer from any error apparent on the face of record and perversity. The Writ Petition is devoid of any merit and is dismissed. No costs. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J)