-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.4127 of 2007 Janata Sahkari Bank Ltd. ..Petitioner vs. 1. M/s Good Earth Industries and others ..Respondents Shri P.S.Dani for petitioner. Shri R.V.Dave i/b M./s N.N.Vaishnav for respondent no.5. Shri Sandesh Deshpande for respondent no.6 CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. 29th February, 2008 29th February, 2008 29th February, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. This writ petition is by Janata Sahakari Bank which is aggrieved by the order passed by the Maharashtra State Cooperative Appellate Court in Misc. Application No.24 of 2005 dated 31st March, 2006 as well as the order passed on the review application. 2. The main order is on the revision application and the Cooperative Appellate Court has directed that the revision application is rejected and order of status quo is vacated. The grievance is that the petitioner has exercised its right under the Securatisation Act whereas respondent no.6 before me is another Cooperative Bank which has obtained the Award -2- against the borrowers and attached the properties in execution. Both the Banks are claiming interest in the properties. The dispute is as to who should get the right to sell the immovable properties and who shall appropriate the dues/sale proceeds in priority over the other claim. 3. The matter was adjourned to enable the parties to take instructions. I suggested to Shri Dani appearing for the petitioner and Shri Deshpande appearing for respondent no.6 that the dispute between the two of them can be resolved by directing the Sheriff of Mumbai to sell five flats, namely, flat nos.1, 101, 201, 301 and 401 in Amey Apartments, Pratharna Samaj Road, Vile Parle (East), Mumbai after he complies with the requisite procedure. After the flats are sold by the Sheriff he will retain the sale proceeds with him and not disburse the same either to the petitioner or to respondent no.6 until both of them obtain suitable orders and directions from the Competent Court. The sale proceeds would be invested by the Sheriff in a Nationalised Bank initially for a period of one year and lateron to be renewed as per the orders and directions of the Court. -3- 4. Flat No.301 in Ameya Apartments is in possession of respondent no.5 who claims to be a tenant in respect thereof. Both sides agree that this flat can be sold on "as is where is" basis. Rest of the flats are vacant and unencumbered and hence can be sold on that basis. 5. The Sheriff is directed to follow the procedure that is prescribed in so far as obtaining valuation and fixing of reserve price/bid, getting the same approved from the learned Judge assigned single Judge’s writ petitions on the Appellate Side and thereafter scrutinise and evaluate the bids and seek appropriate directions with regard to issuance of sale certificate and sell these properties. The costs, charges and expenses in that behalf shall be shared equally by the petitioner and respondent no.6. All contentions with regard to the priority and interest in the properties and sale proceeds are kept open for being adjudicated by the competent Court. The Sheriff to complete the sale by 30th April, 2008. 6. I am informed that the petitioner/disputant -4- in dispute no.228 of 1997 on the file of the Cooperative Court at Pune has already impleaded respondent no.6 to this writ petition as party opponent. Even respondent no.5 is also party there. In such circumstances, the Trial Court to decide the dispute as expeditiously as possible and in any event by 31st December, 2008. Petition is disposed of. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)