HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20795 of 2005 Date : 04.02.2011 Between : Veeravalli Venkateswarlu. …..Petitioner And The Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Eluru & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20795 of 2005 ORDER : Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed, questioning the initiation of execution proceedings under Rule 52 of the A.P. Co- operative Societies Rules, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the APCS Rules’). The 4th respondent-Urban Bank was registered under the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, and is doing banking business. The petitioner obtained loan of Rs.50,000/- from the said bank, by executing a bond on 11th January 2000 and when he did not repay the same, at the instance of the 4th respondent-Bank, proceedings were initiated under Section 61 of the A.P.Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 and the competent authority has passed Award No.1276/03-04, dated 13th January 2004. Even after passing of the Award, as the petitioner did not repay the loan amount, respondents have initiated proceedings under Rule 52 of the APCS Rules, to recover the said amount. At that point of time, this writ petition is filed, and this Court passed interim orders on condition of depositing 50% of the amount within a period of four weeks, but the petitioner has not complied with the same. The only ground raised by the petitioner is that in view of enactment of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, no Award can be passed to recover the amount from the petitioner under Section 61 of the A.P.Co-operative Societies Act, 1964. Though in the case of N.Babu Rao Vs. Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Hyderabad[1], a Full Bench of this Court has held that for the claims more than Rs.10 lakhs, Tribunals constituted under the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, will have exclusive jurisdiction to entertain and decide the applications from the loanees and the Deputy Registrar under the A.P.Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 is excluded from dealing with such recovery proceedings, it is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel that the said judgment of this Court is reversed by the Apex Court subsequently. Except the aforesaid ground, as no other ground is raised by the petitioner, and as the petitioner is not questioning the Award passed by the authority, I do not find any illegality in initiating proceedings under Rule 52 of the APCS Rules, to execute the Award passed by the 4th respondent-Bank. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 4th February 2011 ajr [1] 2005 (4) ALT 327