1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 2650 OF 2011 AND WRIT PETITION NO.: 2651 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 2650 OF 2011 AND WRIT PETITION NO.: 2651 OF 2011 *** 1. One of the contentions of the present petitioner is, he has not received any notice of proceeding under section 101 of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 initiated by Respondent Nos.4 and 5 before Respondent No.3. On merits, contention is, the property proceeded against has not been mortgaged and petitioner has not borrowed any loan. 2. In the background of this challenge, I have heard Advocate Mr. Darandale for Petitioners in respective matters, Shri Karpe for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and learned A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 therein. 3. Though attention has been invited to order sheets dated 9th October, 2007 and 16th 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 2650 OF 2011 AND WRIT PETITION NO.: 2651 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. October, 2007 the order sheets only disclose that notices have been served. Learned A.G.P. has fairly pointed out that records of Respondent No.3 do not show any acknowledgment of such service and notices were forwarded for service upon the petitioner to Respondent Nos.4 and 5. Advocate Shri Karpe states that after service, the acknowledgment of service has gone back or ought to have gone back to Respondent No.3's office. 4. It is, therefore, apparent that there is nothing with Respondents to show that notice of section 101 proceeding was served upon the petitioner. In this view and the specific contention that there was no mortgage and no loan, the impugned R.R.C. issued against petitioner are quashed and set aside. Proceedings instituted by Respondent Nos.4 and 5 are restored back to the file of 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 2650 OF 2011 AND WRIT PETITION NO.: 2651 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. Respondent No.3 for taking fresh decision in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before Respondent No.3 on 6th June, 2011 and to abide by its further instructions in the matter. Said Respondent No.3 shall attempt to decide the proceeding finally as early as possible and in any case by 31st August, 2011. 5. Shri Karpe states that the property is already attached should be continued under attachment so that the chances of recovery are not effected. Shri Darandale points out that this attachment orders are already quashed and set aside by the competent authority. I am not inclined to go into this controversy. However, only to protect the interest of Respondent Nos.4 and 5 and without implying anything against present petitioners, the petitioners are directed not to create any third party interest or not to 4 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 2650 OF 2011 AND WRIT PETITION NO.: 2651 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. alter the nature of suit property or deal with it in any way till 31st August, 2011. 6. With these directions, the petitions are disposed of. No costs. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:04/05/2011. ans/2650