IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO.1736 OF 2009 PETITION NO.1736 OF 2009 PETITION NO.1736 OF 2009 Sangli Sangli Sangli Sahakari Bank Ltd ... Sahakari Bank Ltd ... Sahakari Bank Ltd ... Petitioners. Petitioners. Petitioners. Vs. Vs. Vs. State State State of Maharashtra & Ors ... Respondents. of Maharashtra & Ors ... Respondents. of Maharashtra & Ors ... Respondents. Mr V. A. Thorat, Sr. Counsel with H. Toor with Mr S. B. Pawar and S.G. Bane i/b S. K. Legal Associates, for the Petitioners. Mr S. D. Rayrikar, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mr V. R. Dond i/b T.N. Tripathi, Advocate for the Respondent No.4. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. V.C.DAGA, J. V.C.DAGA, J. DATED: DATED: DATED: 02.02. 2009. 02.02. 2009. 02.02. 2009. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. On the motion made by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners, he is allowed to delete the name of Respondent No.5 from array of the parties. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. 2. Rule returnable forthwith. Petition is heard finally by consent of the parties. 3. Mr S.D. Rayrikar, learned A.G.P. appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Mr T.N. Tripathi, learned Advocate appearing for Respondent No.4 respectively waive service. 4. This petition is directed against the order dated 13th January, 2009 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai Division, Mumbai admitting Revision Application No. 17 of 2009 and issuing certain interim directions. 5. By consent of parties, without examining merits or demerits of the impugned order and without recording reasons in support of this order, the impugned order dated 13.1.2009, passed in Revision Application No. 17 of 2009 filed under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, is set aside, permitting the Respondent No.4 to file an objection to the attachment of the property in question with further direction to the Recovery Officer - Respondent No.3 to decide the objection, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order by a reasoned order following the principles of natural justice. All rival contentions are kept open. In view of this directions, the order of attachment dated 10th January, 2004 does not survive. 6. Needless to mention that in the event, order passed by the Respondent No.3 is adverse to Respondent No.4 it would not operate for a period of three weeks thereafter leaving parties at liberty to seek appropriate remedies provided by the Law. Accordingly, rule is made absolute in terms of this order. No order as to costs. (V.C.DAGA, (V.C.DAGA, (V.C.DAGA, J.) J.) J.)