vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6929 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.6929 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.6929 OF 2008 Mukesh T. Narang & anr. ... Petitioners V/s. M/s.Deshmukh Engineering Works & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.P.S. Dani i/b Mrs.Sharvari Shailendra for Petitioners Mr.S.S. Patwardhan for Respondent No.1 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J MHATRE, J MHATRE, J. DATED: OCTOBER 17, 2008 OCTOBER 17, 2008 OCTOBER 17, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . This petition challenges the order passed by Joint Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies in Revision Application No.424 of 2006. By this order, the revision application filed by Respondent No.1 has been allowed and the special recovery officer has been directed to decided the application dated 27.11.2006 of Respondent No.1 in the light of subsequent developments between the bank i.e. Respondent No.2 and Respondent No.1. 2. The said recovery officer Respondent No.3 has been directed to pass appropriate orders on merits in accordance with Rule 107 of the Rules framed under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. The main grievance of the petitioners is that although they are the auction purchasers of the property of Respondent : 2 : No.1, the Divisional Joint Registrar has passed orders directing that only Respondent No.1 should be heard by the SRO. In my opinion, this direction of the Divisional Joint Registrar needs to be modified to the extent that the petitioners will also be heard by the SRO before passing any orders on the application filed by respondent No.1 on 27.11.2006. 3. All contentions of both the petitioners and Respondent No.1 are kept open for the SRO to decide the application in accordance with law. 4. Petition disposed of accordingly.