Tulsi Sureshbhai Darji and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra Thr the Deputy Registrar Cooptive Societies and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Tulsi Sureshbhai Darji and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra Thr the Deputy Registrar Cooptive Societies and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 21 March 2024 (recovery certificate under Section 154B 29 issued against the deceased father of the petitioners) quashed and set aside; liberty preserved to the society to initiate fresh proceedings against the legal representatives of the deceased under the Act; direction that any such proceedings, if filed, be decided as expeditiously as possible.

Issue for consideration

Whether proceedings, and a recovery certificate under Section 154B 29, initiated/issued against a person who had expired before the proceedings were initiated have legal existence, and whether the impugned order dated 21 March 2024 can be sustained.

Court's answer

Proceedings initiated against a dead person have no legal existence; such initiation is void from the very beginning, and when the foundation itself is illegal, no valid order can be built upon it.

Ratio / Principle

The authority could not have continued the proceedings or taken them to their logical conclusion by issuing a certificate under Section 154B 29; therefore the impugned order dated 21 March 2024 cannot be sustained in law and is liable to be quashed and set aside.

Key takeaways

Setting aside the impugned order does not take away the right of the society to proceed in accordance with law; it is open to the society to initiate fresh proceedings, if so advised, against the legal representatives of the deceased in accordance with the provisions of the Act.ratio¶3

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Amit Borkar, J.), decision dated January 6, 2026, disposed of Writ Petition No. 12258 of 2025 challenging the order dated 21 March 2024 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co operative Societies, R- North Division, Mumbai under Section 154B 29 of the Maharashtra Co operative Societies Act, 1960, by which a recovery certificate had been issued against Mr. Sureshbhai M. Darji, father of the petitioners. It was undisputed that the proceedings had been initiated by the society against Mr. Darji himself and not against his legal representatives, and it was admitted that Mr. Suresh M. Darji had expired before initiation. The Court held that proceedings initiated against a dead person have no legal existence and are void from the very beginning; with the foundation itself illegal, no valid order could be built upon it, the authority could not have issued the certificate under Section 154B 29, and the impugned order was quashed and set aside. Quashing does not take away the society's right to proceed in accordance with law: it may initiate fresh proceedings, if so advised, against the legal representatives of the deceased under the provisions of the Act, and any such proceedings are to be decided expeditiously.

11-wp12258-25 final.doc

MPBalekar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 12258 OF 2025

Tulsi Sureshbhai Darji and Ors. … Petitioners V/s. State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents

Vijay Kurle along with P. Gupta for petitioners.

Kavita N. Solunke, Addl. G.P. along with S.L. Babar, AGP for the State – respondent No.1.

Rakesh Bhatkar along with Smita Samel, Dhananjay Junnarkar, Ratnaprabha Junnarkar and Sakshi Kamble for respondent No. 2.

CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : JANUARY 6, 2026

P.C.:

The petitioners have challenged the order dated 21 March 2024 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co operative Societies, R- North Division, Mumbai under Section 154B 29 of the Maharashtra Co operative Societies Act, 1960. By the said order, a recovery certificate has been issued against Mr. Sureshbhai M. Darji, who is the father of the petitioners.

The record clearly shows, and it is not disputed by either side, that the proceedings were initiated by the society against Mr. Darji himself. There is no material on record to show that the proceedings were initiated against his legal representatives. The entire action of the authority proceeded on the footing that Mr.

1

11-wp12258-25 final.doc

Darji was alive and answerable to the proceedings.

It is an admitted position that Mr. Suresh M. Darji had expired before the initiation of the proceedings. Once this fact is accepted, the legal consequence is clear. Proceedings initiated against a dead person have no legal existence. Such initiation is void from the very beginning. When the foundation itself is illegal, no valid order can be built upon it. The authority could not have continued the proceedings or taken them to their logical conclusion by issuing a certificate under Section 154B 29. Therefore, the impugned order dated 21 March 2024 cannot be sustained in law and is liable to be quashed and set aside. At the same time, setting aside the impugned order does not take away the right of the society to proceed in accordance with law. It is open to the society to initiate fresh proceedings, if so advised, against the legal representatives of the deceased, in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

The writ petition stands disposed of with a direction that if any such proceedings are filed, the same shall be decided as expeditiously as possible.

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)

2