1 wp5842.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5842 OF 2010 Chandrakant Jayantilal Kothari, Age: 69 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Gujrathi Galli, Near Gujrat Sweet Mart, Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon & Ors. ...PETITIONERS VERSUS Shri. Madhukar Deoram Patil, Age: 75 years, Occ: Nil, R/o. Plot No.7, Mundada Nagar, Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon & Ors. ...RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION NO.5846 OF 2010 Chandrakant Jayantilal Kothari, Age: 69 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Gujrathi Galli, Near Gujrat Sweet Mart, Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon & Ors. ...PETITIONERS VERSUS Shri. Avinash Madhukar Patil, Age: 40 years, Occ: Nil, R/o. Plot No.7, Mundada Nagar, Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon & Ors. ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr. P.S. Gaikwad, Advocate holding for Mr. A.G. Talhar, Advocate for the petitioners. ... 2 wp5842.10 CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 20TH APRIL, 2011 PER COURT : These petitions are filed challenging the order dated 30-04-2007 passed by the District Forum, Jalgaon in Complaint Nos. 578 of 2006 and 577 of 2006 respectively. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the District Consumer Forum, Jalgaon has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint, saddling the liability in respect of payment of dues/damages on the members of the Managing Committee/Directors/Ex-Directors of the Co-operative Societies, as held by this Court in the case of Sau. Varsha Ravindra Isai vs. Sow. Rajashri Rajkumar Chaudhari and others in Writ Petition No. 5223 of 2009. Therefore, the Counsel for the petitioners submits that these petitions may be allowed. 3 wp5842.10 3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners. Perused the Judgment in Writ Petition No. 5223 of 2009 and other petitions, delivered on 22-12-2010 and more particularly Para-24 and 25 of the said judgment. This Court, in the aforesaid judgment, has taken a view that the orders passed by the District Consumer Forum saddling the liability in respect of payment of dues/damages on the members of the Managing Committee/Directors/past Directors is concerned, the same is erroneous. In short, the District Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. 4. In the present case, it is not in dispute that petitioner No.1 is Ex-Chairman of respondent No.3 Gujrathi Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., Jalgaon, registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and other members are Ex-Directors of respondent No.3 society. 4 wp5842.10 Though the respondents are served, none appears for them. Therefore, the position as stated in para-5 of the petition remain undisputed. 5. Therefore, in the light of the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.5223 of 2009 and others (supra) and also in Writ Petition No.11541 of 2010 in the case of Jagannath Dayaram Lokhande and others vs. The State of Maharashtra and others and for the same reasons, these petitions deserve to be allowed. 6. In the result, the petitions are allowed in terms of prayer clause (C) and (D). The orders passed by the District Consumer Forum, Jalgaon saddling the liability so far the petitioners herein are concerned, is quashed and set aside. 7. It is clarified that the Co-operative Societies / Credit Societies / banks are liable to 5 wp5842.10 meet the liability and the orders passed by the Consumer Forum can very well be executed against such banks / co-operative credit societies. 8. The petitions are allowed and disposed of in above terms. [S.S. SHINDE, J.] sut/Apr11