1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9089/2009 Yadav Industries Versus Registrar Cooperative Societies Raj. Jaipur & Ors. Date of Order : 30.07.2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI Mr.Naseemuddin Quazi, for the petitioner. By the Court: By this writ petition. A challenge has been made to the order dated 07.07.2009, by which the revision petition preferred by the petitioner was dismissed. It is stated that petitioner was given C.C. Limit of Rs.15 lacs in the year 1997. The petitioner industry become sick, therefore, the amount could not be repaid though initially, the petitioner paid a sum of Rs.4,50,000/-, thus the balance amount remains Rs.10.50 lacs. However, by adding interest and penal interest, a huge amount has been shown due against the petitioner. It is stated that under circumstances, the petitioner industry became sick, amount could not be paid, thus after taking note of the aforesaid, the respondents should not effect recovery of the loan amount by auctioning the mortgage property. It is also stated that revision petition, so filed by the petitioner was dismissed summarily, thus, the prayer of the petitioner is not only to set aside the order dated 07.07.2009 but also the orders passed at Annex.4 and Annex.5 by which it was made clear that in 2 absence of payment of loan amount, the mortgage property would be attached. I have considered the submission made by the learned counsel and find that after obtaining C.C. Limit of Rs.15 lacs, petitioner defaulted in making the payment and by now more than 12 years period has already passed. While the revision petition was pending, petitioner had been given time to make payments, however, no payment was made, revisional authority dismissed the revision petition. It is a case where the petitioner has defaulted in making the payment, thus if any recovery is to be effected by the respondents by mean of law, this Court cannot interfere therein, moreso when as per the order of revision authority, petitioner was given sufficient time to pay the loan amount. The petitioner could not show any legal right to set aside the attachment notice, thus even if the revisional order is not running in many pages, it cannot be said to be a summery order because the issue involved is only regarding non-payment of loan amount and it has not been disputed that loan was taken and it was not paid completely. Thus, looking to the aforesaid, the writ petition is found devoid of merit, hence the same is dismissed in limine. (M.N. BHANDARI),J. Preety Item NO.S-31