:1: :1: :1: 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 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4820 OF 2007 M/s.Sai Developers & Builders .. Petitioners. Vs. Shree Warana Sahakari Bank Ltd. & Others .. Respondents. Mr.Mandar Limaye for the petitioners. Mr.A.B.Borkar for respondent no.1. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 27TH FEBRUARY, 2008. DATED : 27TH FEBRUARY, 2008. DATED : 27TH FEBRUARY, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In the instant writ petition the petitioners have impugned the following order: . "Heard Advocate Shri Undale for Applicant. . It is observed that the applicant has not deposited 50-% of recoverable dues before filing this revision application. Therefore, the application is not maintainable without compliance of mandatory provisions as laid down U/s.154(2A) of the M.C.S.Act, 1960. . In view of this, the revision application is hereby rejected for want of compromise U/s.154(2A) of the Act." 3. Mr.Limaye, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that till filing of the revision application the petitioners had deposited Rs.6,87,000/- with the bank out of the total amount of recoverable dues of Rs.15,95,186/-. He further :2: :2: :2: submits that after filing of the revision application the petitioners have deposited another Rs.1,50,000/- with the bank thereby making a total of 50% amount of the total recoverable dues as contemplated by section 154(2A) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. Insofar as the statement in respect of Rs.1,50,000/- is concerned, learned counsel for the respondent-bank submits that no such amount has been deposited by the petitioners. Having confronted with this Mr.Limaye, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners may be given liberty to produce the proof of such deposit before the revisional authority and if they do so it may be directed to take the revision on file and decide it on merits. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties I am satisfied that this petition can be conveniently disposed of by the following order: . The petitioners to approach the Divisional Joint Registrar within a period of two weeks from today and shall satisfy him by producing relevant material in support of their claim that 50% amount of the total recoverable dues has already been deposited by them. If the revisional authority is satisfied about the 50% deposit, as contemplated by section 154(2A) of the Act, it shall recall the order :3: :3: :3: impugned in the petition and take the revision application on file and proceed to decide it on merits. If it is found that the petitioners have not deposited 50% amount of the total recoverable dues they may be given four weeks time from the date of the order that will be passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar to deposit the difference and make good the 50% deposit as required in law. With these observations the writ petition is disposed of. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.)