1 wp-9535-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY srj CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9535 OF 2010 Mr. Vikas S. Joshi .. Petitioner. V/s. The Sarvodaya Co-op. Bank Ltd. .. Respondent. Mr. Prashant Kulkarni, for the Petitioner. Mr. Deepak S. Kangokar, for Respondent No.1. Ms. A.D.Vatkar, A.G.P. for Respondent No.4. CORAM : RANJIT MORE, J. DATE : 15th MARCH, 2011. P.C.: 1 Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2 Petition arises out of proceedings under section 101 of the Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 initiated at the instance of Respondent No.1. Respondent No.4-Assistant Registrar after hearing both the sides granted Recovery Certificate for an amount of Rs.7143.00. 2 wp-9535-10.sxw 3 This order was challenged by Respondent No.1-Bank by filing revision application before Respondent No.4- Jt. Registrar who by his order dated 27th September, 2010 has allowed the revision application and the matter is remanded back to Respondent No.4. 4 The main grievance of Respondent No.1 before the Divisional Registrar seems to be that the Petitioner defaulted more than six installments and, therefore, his account has become NPA and hence, bank is entitled to recover the entire loan amount. This argument was accepted and matter was remanded back. 5 It is, however, the contention of the Petitioner that his account did not render NPA and, therefore, the bank could not have initiated action against under section 101 of the Co-operative Societies Act. 6 Thus, the main issue which is required to be decided is whether the Petitioner defaulted more than six installments of loan and whether his account becomes NPA in accordance with norms of the Reserve Bank of India. The learned counsel for the Petitioner, however, invited my attention to the last portion of the impugned order which reads as under:- 3 wp-9535-10.sxw “ I am convinced that the impugned order is improper and cases should be remanded to the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies. The Respondent Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies to issue modified Recovery Certificate in light of above observations. Hence, I pass following order:- (1) The Revision Applications are allowed. (2) The cases are remanded to the Respondent No.4 to issue Recovery Certificate in light of the above observations. (3) No order as to costs.” 7 The learned counsel for the Petitioner on the basis of above observations pointed out that the learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that there is no finding that the Petitioner defaulted more than six installments. The finding is given by the Jt. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai that the Petitioner's account has become NPA. However, this finding is not supported by any reasons. His contention is that Jt. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai has not considered the Petitioner's submission given in the written submission. 8 The learned counsel for the Respondent supported the impugned order. However, having gone through the impugned order, I find that there are no reasons given by the Jt. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai to support his findings that Petitioner's account has become NPA. 4 wp-9535-10.sxw 9 In the above facts and circumstances, in my opinion, the issue whether the Petitioner defaulted more than six installments and whether his account became NPA will have to be decided, after affording an opportunity of hearing to both the parties. The directions of the Divisional Jt. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai to grant modified Recovery Certificate in favour of the Respondent No.1 bank without giving an opportunity to the Respondent could not be sustained. I, therefore, dispose off the Petition by passing following order:- ORDER (i) The impugned order is quashed and set aside and in his place following order is passed:- (a) Revision Application is allowed. The matter is remanded back to Respondent No.4 – Assistant Registrar. (b) Respondent No.4- Assistant Registrar shall decide the Respondent No.1's application under section 101 of the Co-operative Societies Act against the Petitioner afresh in the light of observation made herein above, after affording an opportunity of hearing to both the Petitioner and Respondent No.1. 5 wp-9535-10.sxw (ii) The Respondent No.4-Assistant Registrar shall dispose off said proceedings as expeditiously as possible and in any case within the period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that all the rights and contention of the parties are expressly kept open. (RANJIT MORE, J.)