Rrajesh v. Baahl vs Versova View Chs Ltd. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rrajesh v. Baahl vs Versova View Chs Ltd. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the Petitioners to move Respondent No.2 (Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies) with their grievance of alleged non-compliance of the 09.02.2024 directions; Respondent No.2 to consider such grievance in accordance with law after giving opportunity to all concerned parties. No costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the directions issued by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Respondent No.2) on 09.02.2024 regarding the management of Respondent No.1 Society were being complied with, and what remedy is available to the Petitioners for the alleged non-compliance.

Court's answer

After the directions issued on 09.02.2024, the Petitioners had not approached Respondent No.2 (Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies) to bring to its notice the nature of the alleged non-compliance, and it was necessary for them to first approach Respondent No.2 in that regard.

Ratio / Principle

The Petitioners are at liberty to move Respondent No.2 with a grievance about the alleged non-compliance of the directions issued on 09.02.2024.

Key takeaways

If such a grievance of non-compliance is raised, Respondent No.2 shall consider the same in accordance with law and after giving opportunity to all concerned parties.ratio¶21
This Court clarified that it has not examined the merits of the rival parties and all issues are kept open.obiter¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Writ Petition No. 3565 of 2024, decided 07.04.2025 (A.S. Chandurkar & M.M. Sathaye, JJ.) — The Petitioners complained that directions issued on 09.02.2024 by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Respondent No.2) regarding the management of Respondent No.1 – Versova View CHS Ltd. were not being complied with. The Court found that the Petitioners had not first approached Respondent No.2 to bring the alleged non-compliance to its notice and held it necessary for them to do so first. The Petitioners were granted liberty to move Respondent No.2 with the grievance; upon such grievance being raised, Respondent No.2 was directed to consider it in accordance with law and after giving opportunity to all concerned parties. The Court expressly clarified that it had not examined the merits of the rival parties and kept all issues open. Writ petition disposed of with no costs.

34 WP-3565-2024 (OS).doc

Digitally signed by HUSENBASHARAHAMANNADAF HUSENBASHARAHAMANNADAFDate: 2025.04.07 19:33:19 +0530

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

WRIT PETITION NO. 3565 OF 2024

Rrajesh V. Baahl & Ors.

..Petitioners

Vs.

Versova View CHS Ltd. & Ors.

..Respondents

Mr. Yatin R. Shah, Advocate for Petitioners.

Mr. Abhishek Sawant a/w. Mr. Chirag Gupta i/b. Solicis JVPD, for Respondent No.1.

Mr. Vishal Khanavkar, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent No.2 to 5 – State.

CORAM: A.S. CHANDURKAR & M.M. SATHAYE, JJ. DATE : 7^TH APRIL 2025

P.C. :

The Petitioners have approached this Court with a grievance that the various directions issued by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies - Respondent No.2 on 09.02.2024 in the matter of management of the Respondent No.1 - Society, are not being complied with. According to the Petitioners, by the aforesaid order, various directions came to be issued to the Respondent No.1 - Society with regard to its management.

We find that after these directions issued on 09.02.2024, the Petitioners have not approached the Respondent No.2 to bring to its notice the nature of the non-compliance as alleged. It would be necessary to the Petitioners to first approach the Respondent No.2 in that regard.

Husen 1/2

34 WP-3565-2024 (OS).doc

In that view of the matter, the Petitioners are at liberty to move Respondent No.2 with a grievance about alleged non compliance of the directions issued on 09.02.2024. If such a grievance is raised, Respondent No.2 shall consider the same in accordance with law and after giving opportunity to all concerned parties.

It is clarified that this Court has not examined the merits of the rival parties. All issues are kept open.

The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

(M.M. SATHAYE, J.) (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

Husen 2/2