1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3320 OF 2010 Deepchand Parasmal Jain & another .. PETITIONERS VERSUS The Hasti Co-operative Bank Ltd., & another .. RESPONDENTS Mr. L.V. Sangit, Advocate holding for Mr. M.L. Sangit, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. V.B.Patil, Advocate for respondent no. 1. ===== CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. DATE : 20 th APRIL, 2010. PER COURT : 1 Order passed by the Member, Co-operative Appellate Court, Aurangabad in Revision Application no. 2/10 on 7-4-2010 is subjected to challenge in this petition. 2 It is not controverted that the goods belonging to the petitioners / borrowers were put to auction and an amount of Rs.16,64,346/- derived as sale proceeds was required to be deposited in terms of the earlier order 2 passed by the co-operative court. However, according to the respondent / bank, when the sale proceedings were completed, bank approached the co-operative court with a view to deposit the amount, however, the bank was granted liberty to deposit said amount in their own account. The matter was thereafter taken to the appellate court. The co-operative appellate court however, has permitted the bank to deposit the sale proceeds in the loan account of the petitioner herein. From the facts stated, it transpires that certificate of recovery of amount as contemplated by section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act for an amount of more than Rs.53,00,000/- has been secured by respondent / bank. The fact therefore remains that the petitioner who is the borrower of the respondent bank has committed default in repaying the loan amount. Considering the amount fetched by auctioning the goods, the co-operative appellate court was justified in permitting the bank to deposit amount in the loan account. Recoverable amount from the borrower / petitioner is more than three times than the amount recovered. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contends that the goods belonging to the petitioner were sold at a lower rate and the procedure prescribed for auctioning the goods was not adhered to and as such, loss to the tune of more than corer of rupees is caused to the petitioner. In that regard separate dispute bearing no. 3 179/2009 is presented to the co-operative court and the same is pending. The allegations made by the petitioner would be investigated in the pending dispute presented by him. So far as the impugned order is concerned, the same is not required to be interfered with in exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Petition is devoid of substance hence stands rejected. 3 In view of dismissal of petition, pending civil application, if any, stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb/office/wp3320.10.odt