1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION jmi WRIT PETITION NO. 857 OF 2010. Pankaj Mafatlal Dalal & Ors. ..Petitioners. v/s. Garden Co-operative Housing Soc. Ltd. & Ors. ..Respondents. .... Mr. J.J. Thakkar, for Petitioners. Mrs. Shefali R. Bhasin, for Respondent Nos. 1 & 3 to 9. .... CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 14TH JULY 2010. P.C. The Petitioners herein had filed Misc. Application Nos. 21 of 2010 and 24 of 2010 in Case No.CC No.II/341/2008 before the Second Co-operative Court at Mumbai, to prosecute Respondent nos. 3 to 9 for allegedly preparing the false and fraudulent minutes of the society as well as to impugn the documents mentioned in paragraph 4 of the said applications as well as for striking of the defenses of the Respondents. The allegations made by the Petitioners against Respondent nos. 3 to 9 are denied / disputed by the said Respondents. The said Misc. Applications were rejected by the Second Co-operative Court, Mumbai, by its order dated 3rd March 2010 inter-alia observing as 2 follows :- “Admittedly, at present, the dispute is yet not decided, the stage of the dispute is upto the filing of the evidence by the disputant. The documents alleged to be fabricated by the opponents are not yet proved in the evidence. Unless and until, there is final decision on merits on the issues before this Court, the Court cannot come to proper conclusion about the alleged falsification or fabrication of the documents. Further, there is no specific provision under the M.C.S. Act, to take the cognizance about the falsification and fabrication of the documents by anybody else except sanction of the Registrar of the Co-operative Society, or to make such report to the Registrar, Co-operative Societies.” The said order dated 3rd March 2010 is impugned by the Petitioners in the present Writ Petition. 2. This Court is informed by the Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioners as well as the Respondents that Case No. CC-II/34/2008 has been finally decided in favour of the Petitioners. The Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioners submits that in view of section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Co-operative Court ought to have ordered prosecution against Respondent nos. 3 to 9 for the offences alleged. However, it is pointed out by the Learned Advocate appearing for the Respondents and fairly conceded by the Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioners that section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was not relied upon by the 3 Petitioners before the Second Co-operative Court at the time of the hearing of Misc. Application Nos. 21 of 2010 and 24 of 2010. 3. The Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioners, therefore, seeks to withdraw the present Writ Petition with liberty to file fresh proceedings before the Co-operative Court seeking reliefs against Respondent nos. 3 to 9 on the basis of section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 4. Under the circumstances, Writ Petition is disposed of as withdrawn, with liberty as sought. Needless to add that if any such proceedings are filed by the Petitioners, the same will be heard on its own merits and it will be open to the Respondents to advance all submissions on facts as well as law. [ S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. ]