1 wp-6068-10.doc Ladda IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6068 OF 2010 Parshwanath Co­operative Bank Ltd and others .. Petitioners. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr. A.A. Kumbhakoni, Senior Advocate i/by A.M. Kulkarni, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr P.P. Chavan i/by Navdeep Vora & Associates for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Mr. C. R. Sonawane, A.G.P. for Respondent nos.1, 5 and 6. CORAM: D.D.SINHA & A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATE: 1st August, 2011 P.C. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the 2 wp-6068-10.doc learned counsel for the respondents. 2. Writ petition is directed against the communication dated 30­4­2010 issued by the Respondent No.4 ­ Sub­Registrar of Assurances, Taluka Hatkanangale, District Kolhapur, whereby petitioner No.1­Bank is informed that, if the petitioners want to register sale certificate, no objection certificate from MIDC ­ Respondent No.2 be obtained, since the land in question is under the proposed acquisition, proceeding thereof has already been commenced for acquiring the land for respondent No.2­MIDC. 3. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioner No.1 is a Co­operative Bank, who has given loan to petitioner No.3. Since the petitioner No.3 committed default, the land which was mortgaged to the petitioner­Bank was auctioned and purchased by the petitioner No.2. The sale certificate was issued on 27.4.2010. However, when the petitioners went to the Sub­Registrar for registering the document, he refused to do that, unless the petitioners obtain no objection from MIDC, since the land in question is under proposed acquisition for MIDC ­ Respondent No.2. 3 wp-6068-10.doc 4. The counsel for respondent No.2 has not disputed that land in question was under proposed acquisition, the notices under section 32 (2) of the MIDC Act of 1961 are already issued and objections are invited. The learned counsel for Respondent No.2 states that the respondent No.2 has no objection, if the document in question is registered by the Respondent No.4, however, the same should be subject to the land acquisition proceeding already commenced/initiated under the provisions of the MIDC Act. 5. On the backdrop of above referred facts, the Assistant Government Pleader particularly, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for Respondent No.2 that Respondent No.2 has no objection if the document is registered, Respondent No.4 shall take necessary steps accordingly for registration of the document. 6. The counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners are not pressing prayer clause A to C in the petition at this stage. 7. In view of the specific statement made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, there is no necessity to issue further directions in this matter and it is for the respondent No.4 to take appropriate steps 4 wp-6068-10.doc accordingly. 2. With these observations writ petition is disposed of. (D.D. SINHA, J.) (A.R.JOSHI, J.)