1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Writ Petition No.1117 2008 [Devchand @ Devanand G. Shingare Vs. Shikshak Sah. Bank Ltd. & ors.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. C.V. Kale, Adv., for the petitioner. Mr. A.M. Ghare, Adv., for respondent nos. 1 and 2 [absent]. Mr. A.W. Paunikar, Adv., for Respondent No.3. ----- CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE AND A.H. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : 10th November,2008. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. Recovery proceedings under Rule 107 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961, were initiated and ultimately the said proceedings resulted in the Sale Proclamation dated 6th February, 2008. The petitioner seeks to challenge the said proclamation. 3. Under Clause 13 (i) of Rule 107 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961, there is a remedy for the petitioner to approach the Sale Officer with an application to revoke the same on depositing with the Recovery Officer the payment as set out therein. 2 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the mortgaged property, which is a subject-matter of impugned Sale Proclamation, was a joint property and the petitioner has not signed any Mortgage-Deed. 5. When the Partnership Firm was represented by more than one partners, and if some of them have already signed the Mortgage- Deed, the grievance raised by the petitioner cannot be considered in a Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. Thus, the petitioner's remedy may lie somewhere else. 6. Hence the petition is rejected with liberty to the petitioner as is available in law. Judge Judge |Hedau|