wp2126-11.doc 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2126 OF 2011 Chandrashekhar Harihar Gadre .. Petitioner versus Sitaram Chhaya Co-op. Housing Soc Ltd & Ors .. Respondents Mr.Madhav Jamdar for the petitioner. Mr.V.T.Chavan for respondent No.1. Mr.R.M.Patne, A.G.P for respondent Nos.2, 3 and 5. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 8th JUNE 2011. P.C.: . Heard. The orders under challenge pertain to issuance of certificate under section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The certificate is issued at the instance of a Co-operative Housing Society of which the petitioners’ predecessor-in-title was a member. He was alloted a flat. The petitioners have succeeded to his estate. There was a default committed in paying the maintenance charges and that is how the Society approached the Authorities under the Maharashtra Co- operative Societies Act, 1960. The recovery certificate has been wp2126-11.doc 2 issued in the sum of Rs.94,039/-. That certificate came to be challenged by institution of revision application under section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. Upon dismissal of the same, this writ petition is filed. 2 The only submission raised before me by Mr.Jamdar appearing on behalf of the petitioners is that the Society claimed a sum of Rs.1,25,000 and odd which constituted principal and interest. However, later on the principal amount came to be reduced to Rs.39,000 and odd. The interest, therefore, ought to have been computed on that principal sum and so computed there is a patent error in the accounts of the Society and, therefore, the amount as determined cannot be recovered. 3 Having perused the orders under challenge, I am satisfied that there is no error apparent or perversity in as much as the computation and calculation is in terms of the figures stated in the said orders. Even the interest has been scaled down on the basis of the principal amount re-calculated but since the petitioners’ predecessor was in arrears, the interest begins to run wp2126-11.doc 3 from the date the amount was due and payable. So computed and calculated, the interest has been quantified on the principal sum as re-computed. In such circumstances, there is no reason to interfere as this is not a Court of further appeal enabling it to re-appraise and re-appreciate the materials on record. Petition is, therefore, dismissed. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)