1 wp7939 ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7939 OF 2010 Karveernagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. ...Petitioner vs. Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operataive Societies, Kolhapaur Division,Kolhapur & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Chetan Patil for the Petitioner Ms Aparna Vhatkar, A.G.P for respondent nos.1 & 2 Mr. Aniruddha Rajguru h/f Mr.Sachin Pawar for respondent nos.3 & 4 Mr.A.M.Savagave for respondent no.5 CORAM : A.S.OKA,J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 P.C.: 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the letter dated 11 th September 2008, issued by the Assistant Registrar of Co- operative Societies, the petitioner society filed a revision application under section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act,1960. By the impugned order, the revision application has been rejected. The challenge in this petition is to the communication dated 11 th September 2008 as well as to the order of the Revisional Authority. 2 The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Assistant Registrar had no authority to grant permission to the Sub Registrar 2 wp7939 of Assurances to register the agreement dated 19 th December 2005. He submitted that the executant of the said agreement Mr.Bhosale was not at all the member of the petitioner-society and he has no right to execute any agreement in respect of any plot. The learned counsel submitted that the communication issued by the Assistant Registrar is without jurisdiction. His submission is that even the transferee under the said document was not a member of the Petitioner-society. 3 I have considered the submissions. Communication dated 11 th September 2008 does not decide any issue. The said communication does not make any adjudication as regards rights of the parties to the agreement dated 19 th December 2005. At highest, the said communication records no objection by the Assistant Registrar for registration of the agreement. 4 No objection recorded in the said letter does not confer any legality on the transaction reflected from the said agreement. Whether the transferor or the transferee are the members of the petitioner- society is the issue which is not decided by the said communication and the said issue remains open. The said communication does not establish the right of the transferor in respect of the plot. 5 As the impugned communication and the order of Revisional Authority does not decide any issue as regards legal rights, the said communication will not confer any authenticity on the transaction 3 wp7939 effected under the agreement dated 19 th December 2005. 6 Subject to what is observed above, no interference is called for. Writ Petition is rejected. JUDGE