IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 592 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 20/04/2009 in WP NO : 20360 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1) Jadhav Sevantha Bai W/o. Late Ambaji Jadhav through their Special Power of Attorney Holder, A. Krishna Reddy, S/o. Late Venkat Reddy, Age 39 Yrs., R/o. Champapet, Hyderabad, R/o. Chinna Naik Janga, Nagapur Gram Panchayat, Utnoor Mandal,Adilabad District. 2) Jadhav Kondal Rao S/o. Late Ambaji Jadhav through their Special Power of Attorney Holder, A. Krishna Reddy, S/o. Late Venkat Reddy, Age 39 Yrs., R/o. Champapet, Hyderabad, R/o. Chinna Naik Janga, Nagapur Gram Panchayat, Utnoor Mandal,Adilabad District. 3) Jadhav Gopal Rao S/o. Late Ambaji Jadhav through their Special Power of Attorney Holder, A. Krishna Reddy, S/o. Late Venkat Reddy, Age 39 Yrs., R/o. Champapet, Hyderabad, R/o. Chinna Naik Janga, Nagapur Gram Panchayat, Utnoor Mandal,Adilabad District. 4) Jadhav Suresh S/o. Late Ambaji Jadhav through their Special Power of Attorney Holder, A. Krishna Reddy, S/o. Late Venkat Reddy, Age 39 Yrs., R/o. Champapet, Hyderabad, R/o. Chinna Naik Janga, Nagapur Gram Panchayat, Utnoor Mandal,Adilabad District. 5) Jadhav Ramana Rao S/o. Late Ambaji Jadhav through their Special Power of Attorney Holder, A. Krishna Reddy, S/o. Late Venkat Reddy, Age 39 Yrs., R/o. Champapet, Hyderabad, R/o. Chinna Naik Janga, Nagapur Gram Panchayat, Utnoor Mandal,Adilabad District. ..... APPELLANTS AND 1 Vinay R. Saboo S/o. Ram Dayal Saboo R/o. 3-6-451, Lane No.5, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad. 2 The Arbitrator / Additional Registrar of Cooperative Societies, O/o. The Commissioner for Cooperative and Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Andhra Pradesh, Gruhakalpa Building, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 Sri Venkateswara Cooperatie House Building Society Ltd., for A.P. Legislators Limited, rep. by its President, Road No.12, Extension, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MR.V.S.R.ANJANEYALU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR COOPERATION The Division Bench of this Court made the following : (Judgment follows 3rd page) THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 592 of 2009 . JUDGMENT : (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V.Afzulpurkar) This writ appeal is directed against the interim order made absolute by order of this court dated 20-4-2009 in WVMP.No. 1079 of 2009 in WPMP.No. 26588 of 2008 in WP.No.20360 of 2008. 2. Respondent Nos. 3 to 7 are the appellants, who questioned the said order of this court. 3. Heard Sri V.S.R. Anjaneyulu, the learned counsel for the appellants and Sri V.Vedula Venkataramana, the learned counsel for the respondents (writ petitioner) and as well as the learned Govt.Pleader for Co-operation and with the consent of the learned counsel, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal. 4. The issue falls in a narrow compass, the appellants filed ARC.No. 5 of 2008 before the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies under section 61 of the AP Co-operative Societies Act, raising of a dispute with respect to Plot No. 267/A/B admeasuring 750 sq.mts situated at Sri Venkateswara Co-operative House Building Society Limited, Shaikpet, Hyderabad. The said dispute was raised by contending that the society in fact allotted the said plot to the predecessors of the appellant, Sri Ambaji Jadhav, Ex.MLA and that the respondents and their legal representatives obtained allotment and in turn had sold the said property under various documents among the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 successively. The last of the sale deed was made in favour of the sixth respondent. Alleging that the second respondent has no eligibility for allotment of said plots, the above ARC is filed. By order of the Deputy Registrar, dated 19-7-2008, under section 62 (4) of the AP Co-operative Societies Act, interim order was passed directing the society to ensure that no construction is carried out in Plot No.267/A/B till further orders. Questioning the aforesaid order of the Deputy Registrar, the first respondent herein filed the writ petition inter alia seeking a writ of prohibition restraining the first respondent Deputy Registrar in the writ petition from proceeding with the determination of ARC.No. 5 of 2008. Pending the said writ petition, this court by an order dated 10-1-2008 suspended the interim order passed by the Deputy Registrar, the said interim order was continued by further orders of this court and later on counter-affidavit filed by the appellants, the said interim order is made absolute under the impugned order passed by the learned single Judge, dated 20-4-2009. 5. Considering the submissions of both the learned counsel, the main contention of the learned counsel for the first respondent-writ petitioner seeking a writ of prohibition against the determination of ARC.No.5 of 2008 before the Deputy Registrar itself appears to be misconceived in-as-much-as there is no allegation to substantiate any inherent lack of jurisdiction with the Deputy Registrar in entertaining the said dispute under section 61 of the AP Co-operative Societies Act. Since it cannot be said that the Deputy Registrar has no jurisdiction, the adjudication as instituted under section 61 must be allowed to be proceeded with. There are various other contentions raised by the first respondent, which are matters on factual side and which require adjudication by the Deputy Registrar in the main dispute to be tried and decided under section 61 of the Act. We therefore, deem it appropriate to direct the Deputy Registrar – first respondent in the writ petition to hear and determine the said dispute in ARC.No. 5 of 2008 expeditiously on or before 31-7-2009. It is made clear that both parties are at liberty to raise all available pleas as permissible in law and lead evidence if any in support of the same. So far as the direction in the interim order of the Deputy Registrar directing that no construction shall be made in the disputed plot is concerned, it is seen that the said order was suspended by this court as early as on 18-9-2008 and the same continues even now. In view of the fact that for the last six months there is no interim order in favour of the appellant, we deem it appropriate that the said interim order passed by this court on 18-9-2008 shall continue to operate pending disposal of ARC.No.5 of 2008 before the Deputy Registrar. It is also made clear that the construction made by the first respondent herein (writ petitioner) shall be at his risk and costs. 6. Accordingly, the writ appeal and writ petition are disposed of. No costs. ________________________ JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI. ____________________________ JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZUL PURKAR. 29-4-2009. I s L