IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 7209 of 2007 Between: M/s. Progressive Agro Implements, Rep. by its Propriter Sri N. Rangaiah S/o. Late Veeraiah R./o. F-1, Industrial Estate, Sanath Nagar, Hyderabad-18 ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Prudential Cooperative Bank Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director, Sai Ram Towers, Alexander Road, Secunderabad. 2 The Cooperative Tribunal, Rep. by its Presiding officer, Chandra Vihar, Hyderabad. 3 Smt. Leelavathi W/o. Sri Rangaiah R/o. Flat NO. 104, H.No. 10-5-22/1A&B, Narsimha Krupa Apartments, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 4 Sri N. Vinoba S/o. N. Rangaiah R/o. H,.NMo. 1234, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad-18 5 Sri J. Surender S/o. J. Madhan Rao Hyderabad-12 6 Mrs. J. Swachita D/o. Sri N. Rangaiah R/o. H.No. 10-5-22/1A &B, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. (Respondents 3 to 6 are not necessary parties in the W.P.) .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the judgment dt. 3-11-2006 in OP No. 1046/2000 on the ﬁle of the Cooperative Tribunal, Chandra Vihar, Hyderabad(R-2) is illegal, arbitrary, and discriminatory and is in violation of Article 14 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Judgment dt. 3-11-2006 passed by Respondent No. 2 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.M.R.VELU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following ORDER: While issuing notice before admission on 10.04.2007, this Court granted an interim order, on condition that the petitioner deposits the amount covered by the order, dated 03.11.2006, with interest at the rate of 6% instead of 22%. The petitioner did not dispute its liability to pay the amount, but the controversy was only as to the rate of interest. Till today, the petitioner did not pay any amount and on the other hand, ﬁled W.P.M.P.No.5038 of 2008 with a prayer to grant six months time to make deposit of the amount. Even this period of six months expired by 19.08.2008. Not a single rupee was deposited so far. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:10.09.2008 kdl