1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR C.A.W. No.2678/2010 in Writ Petition No.629/2007 ( Maharashtra State Cooperative Bank Ltd., through its Manager, Nagpur ..V/s.. State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary & others ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr.M.V. Samarth, Adv. for intervenor. Mr. R.S. Sundaram, Adv. for respondent no.2. Mr. R.B. Puranik, Adv. for respondent no.3. Mr. P.D. Meghe, Adv. for respondent no.3. Mr. Abhay Sambre, Adv. for respondent no.3. Mr. V.M. Deshpande, Adv. for respondent nos.4 to 24. Mr. H.R. Gadhia, Adv. H/f. Mr. R.M. Tahaliyani, Adv. for intervenor. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATE : 8th DECEMBER, 2010. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. Perused the application and also additional affidavit dated 6/12/2010 filed by respondent no.3  applicant. By said application, the respondent no.3 is seeking review of the order dated 3/8/2010 pointing out that relevant orders passed earlier and material facts were not brought to notice of this Court. It is further stated that when the bid to be 2 accepted is below the upset price, the prior written permission of Registrar is required and when the property of society is auctioned the prior permission of Government of Maharashtra is also necessary. Without these prior permissions the bid was placed before this Court for acceptance. Attention is invited to earlier order dated 18/11/2009 when this Court had refused to accept the bid below upset price and had directed to determine that price again. Further order determining that price passed on 8th of March 2010 is also pointed out. Some allegations are also made in the matter against the then Liquidator Shri Nitin Shirbhate. The additional affidavit is also accompanied by a communication dated 11/10/2010 sent by present Liquidator to the Director of Textiles of State Government. Shri Bhangde, learned Senior Advocate appearing for one of the intervenor Shri Ramratan Sarda has invited attention to subsequent orders passed by this Court on 11/10/2010 to show that in said order this Court has already noticed that on 3rd of August 2010 full facts were not brought to its notice. 3 Learned Senior Advocate Shri Dharmadhikari appearing for the original bidder in whose favour order dated 3rd August 2010 was passed has pointed out that the order has been passed by this Court with the consent of all the parties and with their assistance. He further points out that on 3rd August 2010 present review applicant Shri Vijay Ranpise has himself filed an affidavit and on the strength of that affidavit, order has been passed on 3rd August 2010. According to the learned Senior Advocate the process has been going on under the supervision of the Court and when all the facts are on record, the contentions raised by said Vijay later on in the present review application cannot be accepted. It is also pointed out that review application is filed on 30th September 2010 without explaining any delay and there is no prayer for condonation of delay. The fact show that one of the intervenors - a proprietorship concern Ramratan Sarda has offered the amount of Rs.5.41 Crores for Gandhibagh building and also deposited the same with the Registrar of this Court. There are 4 two other applicants who too offered higher amount for the said property. In review application no grievance is made about the price fetched by Khasra No.19. The grievance is only made about the plant and machinery and about Gandhibagh building. The perusal of order dated 3rd August 2010 shows that at that time the attention of this Court was not invited to two earlier orders mentioned above. On 17/6/2010 some orders were passed by this Court and a report of Liquidator was called for in respect of negotiations. After receipt of that report, on 12th June 2010 the Court wanted to know the terms and conditions of the payment as respective counsel then appearing stated that the amount of bid should be directed to be deposited with the Registrar of this Court. The counsel then representing Liquidator pointed out that the amount deposit would be governed by the terms and conditions by the offer documents. Hence time was given to parties till 26/7/2010 and then till 3/9/2010 to study these documents. Thereafter order dated 3rd of August 2010 came to be passed. 5 The facts nowhere show that the fact of bid being below the upset price was pointed out to this Court and its attention was invited to the earlier orders in support thereof. All these developments therefore, necessitate to recall the order dated 3rd August 2010. Accordingly in the interest of respondent no.3 and all concerned, said order is recalled. Various applicants have filed applications for intervention. C.A.W.No.2945/2010 is filed by proprietary concern of Shri Ramratan Sarda and he has also deposited the amount of Rs.5.41 Crores to show bonafides. C.A.W. No.2353/2010 is filed by the person in whose favour the order dated 3rd August 2010 is operating and his learned Senior Counsel makes a statement that he is ready and willing to pay balance sum of Rs.5.31 Crores and the same will be deposited with the Registrar to show 6 bonafides within 30 days. The amount of Rs.10 Lac is already deposited by him with respondent no.3 as an earnest money. C.A.W.No.2992/2010 has been filed by Gandhi Builders and Developers and Adv. Shri Gadhiya present for the said firm states that his client will also deposit the amount of Rs.5.41 crores to show bonafides within 30 days. C.A.W.No.2994/2010 is filed by one Gopi Didwania. Adv. Shri Tahilwani for said person is not present. Adv. Shri Gadhiya H/f. Adv. Shri Tahilwani states that said person is also ready and willing to deposit the amount of Rs.5.41 crores with the Registrar of this Court within 30 days. Adv. Shri Kshirsagar states that he has been instructed by M/s. Mahalaxmi Developers and Builders and that they also want to file an application for intervention and they are ready and willing to deposit the amount of Rs.5.41 Crores within 30 days. 7 Adv. Shri V.A. Dhabe on behalf of one Mr. Jaikisan and others also states that he wants to move an application for said purpose and amount of Rs.5.41 crores will be deposited with the Registrar of this Court within 30 days to show bonafides. It is already noted that proprietary concern M/s. Ramratan Sarda has already deposited the amount of Rs.5.41 crores and the proposed applicants are directed to deposit that amount within a period of 30 days from today with the Registrar of this Court and to move the appropriate application for intervention. Adv. Shri Meghe for respondent no.3 states that in this situation the respondent no.3 should be permitted to re-advertise for the plant and machinery and property at Gandhibag and fresh bids may be called for. Accordingly permission is given to respondent no.3 to advertise these two properties. The process of issuing the advertisement and calling and processing the bids may be completed within a period of 30 days from today. The present Liquidator to insert a 8 condition that bidders responding to the advertisement shall be required to deposit the minimum amount of Rs.5.41 crores with the Registrar of this Court while submitting their bids. Upon request of Sr. Adv. Shri Bhangde the amount of Rs.5.41 crores deposited by Ramratan Sarda be invested in any nationalized bank in a fixed deposit account for a period of one month. Similarly, the amount of Rs.5.31 crores which will be deposited by the client of Sr. Adv. Shri Dharmadhikari be similarly invested. Place the matter for further consideration on 17th of January 2011. Steno copy allowed. Judge Tambaskar.