Disposed

Sakina Tayabji Dholkawalla and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC11 Jun 2008WP/969/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition concerning recovery of arrears by a Housing Society from members. Court considered issue of interest inclusion and nomination status. Arrangement made for full payment adjustment with balance returned to petitioners. Petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Directed that balance sum be paid over to petitioners by registry after adjustment as agreed upon by parties in full settlement of recovery certificate claims.

Sakina Tayabji Dholkawalla and Anr. Vs State… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2008)

¶1

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶2

 WRIT PETITION NO.969 OF 2008

¶3

 Sakina Tayabji Dholkawalla & Anr. .. Petitioners

¶4

 Versus

¶5

 State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents
 ---

¶6

 Mr.C.P.Deogirikar for the petitioners.

¶7

 Mr.R.R.Bhosale, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶8

 Ms.Kanchan Chimbulkar for respondent No.4.

¶9

---

¶10

CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARIJ.
DATE : 11th June, 2008

¶11

P.C.

¶12

 1. On this petition notice was issued upon a

¶13

 condition that petitioners shall deposit a sum of
 Rs.12,000/- in this Court. The petitioners have
 deposited Rs.12,000/- on 29th April, 2008 and that is
 how notice was issued to the Society.

¶14

 2. The Society has filed an affidavit in reply and a
 copy of the same is duly served on advocate appearing
 for the petitioners.

¶15

 3. I have heard Mr.Deogirikar appearing for the
 petitioner, the learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent
 Nos.1 to 3 and Ms. Chimbulkar for respondent NO.4. I

¶16

:2:

¶17

 have perused the order passed by the Deputy Registrar
 and Divisional Joint Registrar so also the figures which
 have been mentioned in the statement of accounts/bill
 register.

¶18

 4. It appears that Society applied under Section 101
 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 for
 issuance of Recovery Certificate and request of the
 Society was that the petitioners were in arrears of
 Rs.11,574/- and inspite of demand notice by the Society
 they failed to pay.

¶19

 5. On the other hand, the contention of the

¶20

 petitioners was that for last three years there was no
 water provided in the flat and there is a leakage. It
 is not as if the Society was not paid the sum as
 demanded and attention was invited to the contribution
 of Rs.07,01,800/- by the petitioners.

¶21

 6. The Recovery Certificate was issued for

¶22

 Rs.11,574/- together with additional interest. But

¶23

 Mr.Deogirikar’s submission is that the statement of
 accounts would show that the sum of Rs.11,574/- includes
 interest and therefore further sum by way of interest

¶24

 could not have been directed to be deposited. His
 further submission is that the revisional authority was

¶25

:3:

¶26

 in error in not applying its mind to these aspects and
 merely because the Society’s claim is not of a
 substantial amount does not mean that the authority
 should not have considered the request and the
 submissions of the petitioners.

¶27

 7. The Society has filed an affidavit and the sum of
 Rs.11,574/- is mentioned as arrears from April 1998 till
 March 2002.

¶28

 8. After the matter was argued for sometime, both
 sides agreed that from the sum deposited in this Court
 Rs.11,574/- be paid over to respondent No.4-Society.
 However, respondent No.4-Society has stated in the
 affidavit in reply that late Amtubai Dholkawalla was the
 member of Flat No.104, 1st Floor of the Society’s
 building. She died intestate and there is no Will or
 nomination in the records of the Society nor any legal
 representatives of the deceased member have approached
 the Society for right, title or interest in their
 favour.

¶29

 9. Mr.Deogirikar submits that this is factually
 incorrect. There is a nomination in favour of the
 present petitioners and they have approached the
 Society. However, without prejudice he makes a

¶30

:4:

¶31

 statement on instructions that the petitioners will make
 fresh application to the Society for grant of membership
 rights and transfer of the right, title or interest of
 the deceased in respect of the flat in their favour and
 will produce such documents as are relevant for the
 purposes of decision on the same.

¶32

 10. Mr.Deogirikar states that the application would
 be filed within period of 15 days from today.
 Ms.Chimbulkar appearing for respondent No.4-Society
 states that the Society will take a decision on the
 application within the statutory time limit. Needless
 to state that if the Society fails to take such
 decision, all consequences in law shall follow.
 However, it is clarified that this Court has not

¶33

 expressed any opinion in so far as aspect of membership
 is concerned. In the light of agreement arrived between
 the parties that the Society will accept the sum of
 Rs.11,574/- in full and final settlement of all claims
 arising out of the Recovery Certificate, it is directed
 that the balance be paid over to the petitioners by the
 registry after adjustment as above. Petition is
 disposed of accordingly.

¶34

 (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)

Sakina Tayabji Dholkawalla and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sakina Tayabji Dholkawalla and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Industrial Development Bank of India Vs O.L.of Bharat Pipes and Fittings Ltd.

Yamuna M. Shinde Vs S.R.A. and Ors. and Ganesh v. Chilveri and Ors.

Malabar Hill Citizen'S Forum and Ors. Vs Uday Anant Gurav and Ors.

Vaijantibai N. Sawant Vs the Commissioner - Kalyan Dombivali Municipal Corporation and Anr.

K.M. Salian Vs Bank of Baroda

Sayyed Ali Akbar Murtuzai Partners of M/S.May Rose Restaurant Vs State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.