Pune District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd, through Gen. Manager / Senior Officer Vs Jay Hanuman Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit and Ors.

¶1

LPA.16.2013GR.doc

¶2

1

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 16 OF 2013 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 11011 OF 2012 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 22 OF 2013 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 16 OF 2013 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 11011 OF 2012

¶6

Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. ] A body corporate deemed to have been ] registered under Maharashtra Co-operative ] Societies Act, 1960, having its registered ] office at 4-B, BJ Road, Pune 411 001 ] Appellant/ (Through its Gen. Manager/Senior Officer) ]...(Petitioner)

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1. Harshwardhan Patil Vividh Karyakari Seva ] Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit a body ] corporate duly registered under ] Maharashtra Co-op. Societies Act ] having its address at Chikhali, ] Tk-Indapur, Dist. Pune, (Summons ] to be served on it's Chairman) ] ]

¶9

1. The President/Chairman of ] Pune District Central Co-operative Bank, ] 4-B, BJ Road, Pune 411 001 ] ]

¶10

1. The Bank Inspector / Agent, ] Pune District Central Co-operative Bank ] Ltd., Nimgaon Ketatki, Tal. Indapur, ] Dist. Pune. ]

¶11

1 / 12

¶12

Shraddha Talekar P.A.

¶13

LPA.16.2013GR.doc

¶14

2

¶15

]

¶16

1. The Assistant Registrar, ] Co-operative Societies, Indapur ] Taluka – Indapur, District – Pune ] ]

¶17

1. The Divisional Joint Registrar, ] Co-operative Societies Pune Division, ] having office at Sakhar Sankul ] Shivaji Nagar, Pune-411 005. ]... Respondents

¶18

WITH LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 17 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 23 OF 2013 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 17 OF 2013

¶19

Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. ] A body corporate deemed to have been ] registered under Maharashtra Co-operative ] Societies Act, 1960, having its registered ] office at 4-B, BJ Road, Pune 411 001 ] Appellant/ (Through its Gen. Manager/Senior Officer) ]...(Petitioner)

¶20

Vs.

¶21

1. Kalbhairavnath Vividh Karyakari Seva ] Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit & Ors. ]...Respondents

¶22

WITH

¶23

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 18 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 24 OF 2013 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 18 OF 2013

¶24

Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. ] A body corporate deemed to have been ] registered under Maharashtra Co-operative ] Societies Act, 1960, having its registered ] office at 4-B, BJ Road, Pune 411 001 ] Appellant/

¶25

2 / 12

¶26

Shraddha Talekar P.A.

¶27

LPA.16.2013GR.doc

¶28

3

¶29

(Through its Gen. Manager/Senior Officer) Vs.

¶30

]...(Petitioner)

¶31

1. Yashraj Vividh Karyakari Seva ] Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit & Ors. ]...Respondents

¶32

WITH LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 19 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 25 OF 2013 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 19 OF 2013

¶33

Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. ] A body corporate deemed to have been ] registered under Maharashtra Co-operative ] Societies Act, 1960, having its registered ] office at 4-B, BJ Road, Pune 411 001 ] Appellant/ (Through its Gen. Manager/Senior Officer) ]...(Petitioner)

¶34

Vs.

¶35

1. Shri Hanuman Vividh Karyakari Seva ] Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit & Ors. ]...Respondents

¶36

WITH

¶37

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 20 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 26 OF 2013 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 20 OF 2013

¶38

Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. ] A body corporate deemed to have been ] registered under Maharashtra Co-operative ] Societies Act, 1960, having its registered ] office at 4-B, BJ Road, Pune 411 001 ] Appellant/ (Through its Gen. Manager/Senior Officer) ]...(Petitioner)

¶39

Vs.

¶40

3 / 12

¶41

Shraddha Talekar P.A.

¶42

LPA.16.2013GR.doc

¶43

4

¶44

1. Hanuman Vividh Karyakari Seva ] Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit & Ors. ]...Respondents

¶45

WITH LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 20 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 27 OF 2013 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 20 OF 2013 WITH LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 21 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 28 OF 2013 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 21 OF 2013 WITH LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 25 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 31 OF 2013 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 25 OF 2013

¶46

Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. ] A body corporate deemed to have been ] registered under Maharashtra Co-operative ] Societies Act, 1960, having its registered ] office at 4-B, BJ Road, Pune 411 001 ] Appellant/ (Through its Gen. Manager/Senior Officer) ]...(Petitioner)

¶47

Vs.

¶48

1. Shriram Vividh Karyakari Seva ] Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit & Ors. ]...Respondents

¶49

WITH LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 23 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 29 OF 2013 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 23 OF 2013 WITH

¶50

4 / 12

¶51

Shraddha Talekar P.A.

¶52

5

¶53

LPA.16.2013GR.doc

¶54

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 24 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 30 OF 2013 IN

¶55

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 24 OF 2013

¶56

Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. ] A body corporate deemed to have been ] registered under Maharashtra Co-operative ] Societies Act, 1960, having its registered ] office at 4-B, BJ Road, Pune 411 001 ] Appellant/ (Through its Gen. Manager/Senior Officer) ]...(Petitioner)

¶57

Vs.

¶58

1. Jay Hanuman Vividh Karyakari Seva ] Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit & Ors. ]...Respondents

¶59

WITH

¶60

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 32 OF 2013 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2013

¶61

Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. ] A body corporate deemed to have been ] registered under Maharashtra Co-operative ] Societies Act, 1960, having its registered ] office at 4-B, BJ Road, Pune 411 001 ] Appellant/ (Through its Gen. Manager/Senior Officer) ]...(Petitioner)

¶62

Vs.

¶63

1. Pandurang Vividh Karyakari Seva ] Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit & Ors. ]...Respondents

¶64

WITH

¶65

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 27 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 33 OF 2013

¶66

5 / 12

¶67

Shraddha Talekar P.A.

¶68

6

¶69

LPA.16.2013GR.doc

¶70

IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 27 OF 2013

¶71

Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. ] A body corporate deemed to have been ] registered under Maharashtra Co-operative ] Societies Act, 1960, having its registered ] office at 4-B, BJ Road, Pune 411 001 ] Appellant/ (Through its Gen. Manager/Senior Officer) ]...(Petitioner)

¶72

Vs.

¶73

1. Chaitnya Vividh Karyakari Seva ] Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit & Ors. ]...Respondents

¶74

WITH LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 28 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 34 OF 2013 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 28 OF 2013

¶75

Pune District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. ] A body corporate deemed to have been ] registered under Maharashtra Co-operative ] Societies Act, 1960, having its registered ] office at 4-B, BJ Road, Pune 411 001 ] Appellant/ (Through its Gen. Manager/Senior Officer) ]...(Petitioner)

¶76

Vs.

¶77

Vijay Vividh Karyakari Seva ] Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit & Ors. ]...Respondents

¶78

***

¶79

Mr.P.S.Dani i/b Mr.Shailendra S. Kanetkar, Advocate for Appellant.

¶80

Mr.Sanjeev P. Kadam, Advocate for Respondent No.1.

¶81

Mr.S.K. Shinde, GP a/w. Mr.A.B.Vagyani, AGP for Respondent Nos.4 & 5.

¶82

6 / 12

¶83

Shraddha Talekar P.A.

LPA.16.2013GR.doc

7

CORAM : V. M. KANADE & K. R. SHRIRAM, JJ.

¶88

DATE : AUGUST 7, 2013.

¶89

JUDGMENT (per K.R.Shriram, J.) :

¶90

1 These are Letters Patent Appeals filed challenging the judgment and order dated 29^th November 2012 passed by a Single Judge of this Court in a group of 13 Writ Petitions. As done in the impugned judgment, for the sake of brevity, the representative facts are taken from Writ Petition No.11011 of 2012 filed by Respondent No.1.

¶91

2 The Appellant is District Central Co-operative Bank in Pune District registered under the provisions of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and is the Apex Bank for Pune District. Various Primary Agricultural Credit Societies are its Members. Respondent No.1 is a Primary Agricultural Credit Society. The 1^st Respondent had applied to be enrolled as a Member of the Appellant-Society. The same was refused in December 2009. Against the refusal, the first Respondent had filed an Appeal under Section 23(2) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (for the sake of

¶92

7 / 12

¶93

Shraddha Talekar P.A.

¶94

8

¶95

LPA.16.2013GR.doc

¶96

brevity referred as “the MCS Act”) before the Divisional Joint Registrar Co-operative Society, Pune Division, Pune. The Appeal was filed and came to be registered on 11^th November 2011. There was a delay of about 614 days in preferring the Appeal. Therefore, the 1^st Respondent filed an application for seeking condonation of delay of about 614 days in preferring the Appeal. The Divisional Joint Registrar, by his order dated 8^th May 2012, disposed of the condonation application on the ground that there is no period prescribed for deciding the Appeal filed before the Registrar and therefore a question of delay condonation has not arisen and the said application was allowed.

¶97

3 Against the said order, the Petitioner filed Writ Petition in this

¶98

Court. Other connected matters were also filed and all the Petitions were dismissed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 29^th June 2012 holding that as there was no period of limitation prescribed, three years should be deemed to be reasonable period to avail that remedy. The order dated 29^th June 2012 was set aside by the Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No.133 of 2012 with connected matters on 8^th August 2012.

¶99

8 / 12

¶100

Shraddha Talekar P.A.

¶101

9

¶102

LPA.16.2013GR.doc

¶103

4 Respondent No.1-Society and similarly situated other Societies in other matters were given leave to file additional affidavits before the Joint Divisional Registrar to justify the reason for late filing of the Appeal. No such additional affidavits, however, were filed. These affidavits were to substantiate the contention of Respondent No.1-Society that between November 2009 and till actual filing of Appeal before the Divisional Joint Registrar, there were some negotiations and discussions between parties which contributed to delay.

¶104

5 Following this, the Divisional Joint Registrar, by his order dated 6^th November 2012, condoned the delay. The Divisional Joint Registrar has also observed, while condoning the delay, that Respondent No.1-Society is functional at the bottom of ladder and above them is placed the District Co-operative Bank namely the present Petitioner and at the top of the ladder is the State Co-operative Bank. It is pointed out that every Member of Respondent No.1-Society gets benefits of the various Government Schemes.

¶105

9 / 12

¶106

Shraddha Talekar P.A.

¶107

10

¶108

LPA.16.2013GR.doc

¶109

6 As observed by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment, the Divisional Joint Registrar has also looked into the fact that Respondent No.1 is a registered co-operative society which has come into existence and functioning with necessary Members and the Authority felt the need to examine whether benefits of various Government Welfare Schemes can be extended to Members of Respondent No.1-Society or not. The Division Bench of this Court in the earlier round in Letters Patent Appeal No.133 of 2012 has also found that period of three years cannot be said to be reasonable in all cases. At the same time, what is reasonable has not been specified.

¶110

7 As per sub-section1(a) of the MCS Act, the Society is supposed to take decision within 30 days from the date of the receipt of application and to communicate the same to the Applicant within 60 days from the date of receipt of said application. Thus, there is limitation prescribed for Appellant to take decision and to communicate the same. Thereafter, the period which is prescribed for deciding the Appeal if filed before the Registrar is three months from the date of its receipt and it is also mandatory for the Registrar to communicate his decision to the parties within 15 days from the

¶111

10 / 12

¶112

Shraddha Talekar P.A.

¶113

LPA.16.2013GR.doc

¶114

date of decision. There is no period prescribed for filing of the Appeal. When period of limitation has not been prescribed then what is reasonable or not depends on the facts and circumstances of each case and is a discretionary order and cannot be interfered with unless there is any arbitrariness or malafide or perversity.

¶115

8 The Divisional Joint Registrar, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, exercised his discretion to condone the delay. The learned Single Judge has also come to the conclusion that the discretion exercised by the Divisional Joint Registrar in entertaining the Appeals cannot be said to be erroneous or perverse and the Authority has only condoned the delayed approach. The Single Judge has also observed that the entitlement of Respondent No.1 to seek membership is to be looked into on merits and it is open for the Appellant to point out why membership cannot be extended. The Single Judge has very correctly declined to interfere with the order dated 7^th November 2012 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar.

¶116

11 / 12

¶117

Shraddha Talekar P.A.

¶118

12

¶119

LPA.16.2013GR.doc

¶120

9 In the circumstances, the Appeals are rejected with no order

¶121

as to costs.

¶122

10 In view of the above, the respective Civil Applications in the Letters Patent Appeals also do not survive and stand disposed.

¶123

[K. R. SHRIRAM, J.] [V. M. KANADE, J.]

¶124

12 / 12

¶125

Shraddha Talekar P.A.

Pune District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd, through Gen. Manager / Senior Officer v. Jay Hanuman Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pune District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd, through Gen. Manager / Senior Officer v. Jay Hanuman Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit 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

The Maharashtra State Co-Op. Bank Ltd, through Joint Manager Vs Gangapur Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, through Chairman Kailash B. Patil and Ors.

Ramesh Dhanaji Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Land Revenue Dept and Ors.

Ramesh Vasudeo Khare Vs the Commissioner, Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation, Kalyan and Ors.

Pune District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd, through Gen. Manager / Senior Officer Vs Shriram Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit and Ors.

Pune District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd, through Gen. Manager / Senior Officer Vs Shriram Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit and Ors.

Pune District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd, through Gen. Manager / Senior Officer Vs Kalbhairavnath Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit and Ors.