1 wp11625.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 11625 OF 2010 Vijay Sinha Prataprao Tanpure, Age: 34 years,Occ: Agri. & Advocate, R/o. Rohanwadi, Tq. & Dist.Jalna, Through G.P.A. Prataprao Ramrao Tanpure, Age: 67 years, Occ: Agri., R/o. Rohanwadi, Tq.& Dist.Jalna. ..PETITIONER -VERSUS- The Maharashtra State Co-op. Housing Finance Corporation Ltd., Jalna, through its Manager Anuj Commercial Complex, Near Anand Lodge, Opp.Shamprasad Mukharjee, New Jalna 431 203 & Ors. ..RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. S.S. Nirkhee, Advocate holding for Mr. S.A. Nagargoje, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. D.R. Korde, A.G.P. for respondent No.2. ..... (CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.) DATED : 20th January, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard Mr. Nirkhee, learned Counsel for petitioner and Mr. D.R. Korde, A.G.P. for respondent No.2. 2. The contention of learned Counsel for petitioner is Co- operative Court, as also Co-operative Appellate Court dismissed suit on the ground that against the certificate for recovery issued 2 wp11625.10 under the provisions of Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co- operative Societies Act, 1960, dispute under Section 91 thereto was not maintainable. He, therefore, states that petitioner should be given liberty to approach appropriate Forum in the matter. He points out that petitioner had applied for loan of Rs.50,000/- and actually amount of Rs.10,000/- only was disbursed to him. Balance amount was not disbursed and then dispute arose. He further states that out of said amount of Rs.10,000/-, petitioner has refunded amount of Rs.5000/- to Society. 3. Mr. D.R. Korde, learned A.G.P.on the other hand, points out that petitioner has not complied with the terms and conditions of the agreement and therefore,balance instalments were not released. 4. In view of the request made by learned A.G.P., I do not find it necessary to consider merits of controversy. If any other remedy is available to petitioner under the provisions of Maharashtra Co- operative Societies Act even now, he is free to take recourse to it. With this observation, Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE sut/Jan11/wp11625.10