1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4733 OF 2009 The Hill Heaven Co-operative Housing Society Ltd .. Petitioners Vs The Dy.Registrar, co-operative Societies and ors. .. Respondents Mr. S.K.Shinde i/b Sagar Kasar, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms.Cardozo , AGP, for Respondent nos. 1,2 & 4. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATE : 26/08/2009 PC: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition is directed against the concurrent findings of facts recorded by the authorities below, whereby an application of respondent no.1 under section 22(2) of the Maharashtra co-operative Societies Act,1960 has been allowed. Respondent no.1 purchased a flat by the registered sale deed dated 17.10.2007 and thereafter submitted an application for a membership on 22.10.2007 along with the requisite documents to the petitioner-society on 7.11.2007. Since the society failed to take or communicate any decision within the time stipulated, respondent no.1 made an application under section 22(2) to the T 2 Deputy Registrar seeking deemed membership of the society. That application has been allowed and, in the appeal, the order passed by the Deputy Registrar has been confirmed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai Division, Mumbai. Mr Shinde, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that respondent no.1 did not produce probate in respect of a Will, executed by the deceased-member of the society, and in the absence thereof, he is not entitled to become member of the society. He further submitted that respondent no.1 was informed by the society to produce probate and the other relevant documents. Respondent no.1, however, did not produce the documents and, therefore, was not admitted as a member of the society. The petitioner society did not produce any material on record to show that such communication was sent to respondent no.1 asking him to produce the documents. Till today none of the heirs of the deceased-member has come forward, objecting the admission of respondent no.1 as a member of the society. There is no dispute that the deceased-member had executed a Will and had appointed three executors. Out of the three executors of the Will, two died and the remaining one executed the sale deed dated 17.10.2007 in favour of respondent no.1. The heirs of the deceased-member have not challenged the sale deed executed 3 by the executor of the Will, in favour of respondent no.2. That apart, the society has no reason to doubt the sale deed dated 17.10.2007 or even the Will for that matter. In the circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with the orders passed by the authorities below. The writ petition is dismissed. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)