1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1014 OF 2010 (Uttam Jagdeo Ghule vs. The Assistant Registrar, Coop. Society & Anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. APRIL 21, 2010. Heard Shri Kshirsagar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Kankale, learned AGP for respondent No.1 and Shri Dastane, learned counsel for respondent No. 2. The order dated 14.05.2009 issuing RRC in Claim No. 9 of 2009 has been questioned before this Court. Shri Kshirsagar, learned counsel points out that the said order marks absence of the petitioner on 24.02.2009 and draws inference of acceptance of the liability. He further states that on earlier date i.e. 17.02.2009, son of the petitioner attended the hearing and as necessary documents were not supplied to the petitioner, it was decided that the documents would be made available by next date. Without making those documents available, the matter has been decided on next date. Attention is also invited to order sheet as placed on record for said purpose. The respective counsel for the respondents 2 are supporting the impugned order. However, perusal of the order sheets and impugned order reveal that on 24.02.2009 at the most the documents could have been supplied to the petitioner. It is not the case of the respondents that those documents were supplied to the petitioner at any point of time. The impugned order, therefore, is in breach of principles of natural justice. The same is accordingly quashed and set aside. The petitioner has filed Civil Application No. 1193 of 2010 seeking restoration of possession of Tractor back to him. After the impugned order, Respondent No. 2 has taken the possession of the Tractor. In this situation, again directing Respondent No.2 to hand over it back to the petitioner may create problems not only for respondent No. 2 but for the petitioner also. Therefore, interest of justice can be met with by directing Respondent No.1 to decide the proceedings for RRC filed vide Claim No. 9 of 2009 as early as possible and in any case by 31st May 2010. The parties to appear before Respondent No. 1 on 28.04.2010 and abide by his further instructions in the matter. Civil Application is accordingly disposed of. With these directions, writ petition is allowed. Rule accordingly. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.