:1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE APPELLATE APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION CIVIL JURISDICTION CIVIL JURISDICTION CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 651 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO. 651 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO. 651 OF 2008 IN IN IN WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 8895 OF PETITION NO. 8895 OF PETITION NO. 8895 OF 2007 2007 2007 Bassein Catholic Co-op. Bank Ltd. ... Applicants. (Orig. Respondent No.5) V/s. Kishor Kuntadi & Ors. ... Respondents. Mr. B.A. D’Lima i/b. M/s. D’Lima & Asso. for the Applicants. Mr. Patne, A.G.P. for Respondents 1 to 4. ..... CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. 10TH 10TH 10TH FEBRUARY 2009. FEBRUARY 2009. FEBRUARY 2009. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . The Civil Application is for Review. Mr. D’Lima, appearing for the Original Respondent No.5/Review Applicant points out that the order passed by this Court on 21st January 2008 is an ex-parte order. He submits that Respondent No.5 was not given any notice before the Petitioner moved for quashing and setting aside the order of the Divisional Joint Registrar refusing to condone the delay. His submission is that the delay has been condoned without hearing Respondent No.5 and therefore, grave and serious prejudice is caused to Respondent No.5. 2. In his submission, this Court had directed the Petitioner to deposit sum of Rs.1,00,000/- but the cheque issued in that behalf has been dishonoured. 3. It is not necessary to enter into a larger controversy with regard to the order sought to be :2: reviewed. All that has been done is to condone the delay in filing of the Revision Application. However, I have directed that the delay is condoned and Revision Application No.102 of 2006 should be heard in accordance with law. 4. My order does not mean that the Divisional Joint Registrar will overlook Section 154 (2A) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Needless therefore to state that if no compliance is made with the precondition laid down by this provision, then, the Divisional Joint Registrar is at liberty to dispose off/dismiss the Revision Application. The controversy as to whether there is any compliance with this condition or not will have to be decided by the Divisional Joint Registrar. All pleas in that behalf are kept open. Merely because the delay is condoned does not mean that the Petitioner will not have to comply with the condition of 50% of the amount under the Recovery Certificate being deposited. Whether there is compliance with this condition or not or whether the condition needs to be complied in the facts of this case or not are matters which must be decided by the Divisional Joint Registrar and my order does not prevent him doing so. 5. With this clarification, the Review Petition is disposed off. No costs. (S.C. (S.C. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.)