Petitioner challenged attachment of property under Rule 107(19). Court relied on Sangli Sahakari Bank Ltd. to hold that Section 154 provides revisional powers, offering an efficacious alternative remedy. Writ petition dismissed.
Writ petition dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to avail of other remedies.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
wpl 836-019.doc
1/2
sat
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 836 OF 2019
Baljit Kaur
vs State of Maharashtra & Anr.
...Petitioner
...Respondents
Mr.Madhur Rai with Balraj Kulkarni I/b. PRS Legal for Petitioner. Mr.Himanshu Takke, AGP for State.
CORAM : S.C.GUPTE, J.
DATE : 15 MARCH 2019
P.C. :
This writ petition challenges an order passed by a Special Recovery Officer under Rule 107(19) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules on the Petitioner’s application objecting to attachment of property in pursuance of a recovery certificate.
2 It is the case of the Petitioner that the property attached does not belong wholly to the certificate debtor. Rule 107(19) attaches finality to an order passed by the Recovery Officer on any objection to attachment under Sub-Rule (19) subject to the result of the suit, if any, filed by the objector to establish the rights which he claims to the property in dispute. Our court in the case of Sangli Sahakari Bank Ltd. vs. Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai1 has held that Rule 107(19) (c) could not be read de hors Section 154. The finality to the Recovery Officer’s order provided for under Rule 107(19)(c) does not exclude revisional powers conferred by Section 154 on the revisional authority.
1 2002(3) Bom.C.R.427
wpl 836-019.doc
2/2
sat
Thus, the Petitioner has a two-fold remedy. She may either approach the revisional authority challenging the order of the Recovery Officer or file a suit to establish her rights. Since there is an efficacious alternative remedy available to the Petitioner, the writ petition is not entertained.
3 The writ petition, accordingly, is dismissed with liberty to the Petitioner to avail of any other remedy available in law.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition is maintainable to challenge an order of attachment of property under Rule 107(19) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules when an efficacious alternative remedy exists
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sangli Sahakari Bank Ltd. vs. Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, MumbaiRelied on¶15
2002(3) Bom.C.R.427 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Baljit Kaur
State of Maharashtra
S.C. Gupte
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
