1 wp-6957.10 Ash IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6957 OF 2010 Sou Namrata Meghashyam & Anr. .. Petitioners. Vs Shri S.S. Tambekar for the Petitioners. Shri Amit Borkar for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. -- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 9TH SEPTEMBER, 2010 P.C: . Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners. There is no dispute that a certificate under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co- operative Societies Act, 1960 ( hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”) has been issued against the Petitioners in favour of the 1st Respondent – the Credit Society. In execution of the said certificate, the property of the Petitioners was put to an auction by the Special Recovery Officer. The auction was held, and on 21st August, 2009 the entire price has been deposited by the auction purchaser. The Petitioners filed a revision application under Section 154 of the said Act for challenging the auction. By the impugned order, the said revision application has been rejected. 2 wp-6957.10 2. After having heard the submissions of learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners, I find no merit in the petition. The Petitioners could have applied under Sub-rule 13 or Sub-rule 14 of Rule 107 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961 for setting aside the sale. However, the said remedy was not availed of. It is pertinent to note that for availing of the said remedy under Sub-rule 13 of Rule 107 of the said Rules, deposit of 5% of the purchase money was necessary which amount was not deposited by the Petitioners. As of today, admittedly, the Petitioners have not complied with the recovery certificate under Section 101 of the said. Hence, no interference is called for in writ jurisdiction against the impugned order by which the auction sale in execution has been confirmed. The Writ Petition is rejected. (A.S.OKA, J)