Quashed

Ramesh S/O Ramchandra Mahajan v. the Presiding Officer, Maha. State Cooperative Appellate Court, Mumbai, Bench at Nagpur and Ors.

Bombay HC9 Oct 2024WP/6039/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appellate co-operative court dismissed an appeal against dismissal of a Section 91 dispute but stayed its own order till a date, continuing interim protection. The High Court found no basis for the stay and quashed the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 12.09.2024 of the Appellate Co-operative Court quashed and set aside; petition disposed.

Ramesh S/O Ramchandra Mahajan vs the Presiding Officer… — Cooperative Societies | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

wp6039.24.O.odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.6039 OF 2024

¶5

(Ramesh s/o Ramchandra Mahajan Vs. The Presiding Officer, Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court, Nagpur and others)

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar’s Orders.

¶7

Court's or Judge's orders.

¶8

Mr. R. P. Joshi, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. B. M. Lonare, AGP for Respondent No.1/State. Ms. Shweta V. Jaiswal, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

¶9

CORAM: N. R. BORKAR, J. DATE: 15th OCTOBER, 2024.

¶10

Respondent no.2 herein had filed the dispute under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, before the Co-operative Court, Nagpur. By Award dated 10.04.2024 the Co-operative Court, Nagpur dismissed the said dispute. The respondent no.2 had challenged the said award before the learned Appellate Co-operative Court by filing appeal. The learned Appellate Co-operative Court by order dated 12.09.2024 has dismissed the said appeal, however, continued the interim order, which was operating during the pendency of appeal. The said order reads thus:

¶11

“To enable the parties to challenge the judgment and award, in the interest of justice, the operation of order dated 12.09.2024 is hereby stayed and order dated 20.06.2024 passed below Exhibit 5 in appeal no.33/2024 will remain in force till 12.11.2024.”

¶12

wp6039.24.O.odt

¶13

¶14

The above order is impugned in this petition.

¶15

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Appellate Co-operative Court has passed the order impugned on it’s own. It is submitted that the same is not permissible.

¶16

On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submits that oral request was made to extend the order dated 20.06.2024 passed below Exhibit-5.

¶17

I have perused the impugned order and there is no reference of oral request. In that view of the matter, the order impugned can not be allowed to stand and the same is quashed and set aside.

¶18

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid

terms.

(N. R. BORKAR, J.)

NSN

Signed by: Mr. N.S. Nikhare Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 18/10/2024 18:41:48

Ramesh S/O Ramchandra Mahajan v. the Presiding Officer, Maha. State Cooperative Appellate Court, Mumbai, Bench at Nagpur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh S/O Ramchandra Mahajan v. the Presiding Officer, Maha. State Cooperative Appellate Court, Mumbai, Bench at Nagpur 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vidya Vikas Mandal, Lakhandur, Bhandara Thr Its President Smt. Kavita Sadashiv Donadkar and Others Vs State of Maharashtra Thr Secretary, Ministry of Education, Mumbai and Others

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Thr. Depot Manager, Bramhapuri, Gadchiroli and Anr. Vs Firozkhan Umarkhan Pathan

Vachhalabai W/O Hansdas Bagale Vs Ku. Nirmala D/O Ramdas Wagade, Smt. Nirmala W/O Vithal Banode and Others

Dhananjay @ Banda Kashinathsapate vs the State of Maharashtra

Tushar @ Ajay S/O Prabhakar Battulwar Vs Sau. Bhagyashree @ Vibha W/O Tushar @ Ajay Battulwar and Another

Shahaji Bira Solankar vs the State of Maharashtra