Bombay High Court
JAGANNATH LAXMAN JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROU. SEC. CO-OPERATION MARKETING AND TEXTILE DEPT AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court held that the Government Resolution does not bar the statutory recovery, and therefore the petitioner's request for a stay of the recovery proceedings could not be granted.
Summary
The petitioner, Jagannath Laxman Jadhav, sought a stay of recovery proceedings initiated by Shri Kulswami Co‑Op Credit Society Ltd. under a Recovery Certificate issued pursuant to Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co‑operative Societies Act, 1960, after defaulting on a loan of Rs 50 million. He claimed to have repaid the loan but still faced attachment of his shop in a cooperative housing society and relied on a Government Resolution dated 21‑05‑2025 for relief. The Court examined whether the Resolution provided any substantive protection against the statutory recovery process. It held that the Resolution was merely a policy decision concerning settlement schemes and did not confer any right to stay or postpone the proceedings. Consequently, the petition for stay was rejected. The petition was dismissed, leaving the recovery process to continue under the Act.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a stay of the recovery proceedings under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co‑operative Societies Act, 1960.
- Whether the Government Resolution dated 21‑05‑2025 provides any legal basis to restrain the attachment and sale of the petitioner's property.
- Whether the petitioner's claim of repayment affects the validity of the Recovery Certificate and the attachment order.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 — s. 101, 156(1)
- Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules — s. 107
Subjects
- loan default
- recovery certificate
- stay of proceedings
- Maharashtra Co‑operative Societies Act
- government resolution
- attachment
- co‑operative housing society
Judgment
1/3 5 WP-12894-25.odt
Salgaonkar
MANDIRA MILIND
SALGAONKAR
Digitally signed by MANDIRA
MILIND SALGAONKAR
Date: 2026.06.18 18:44:51 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.12894 OF 2025
Jagannath Laxman Jadhav .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through .. Respondents
Secretary, Co-Operation, Marketing
and Textile Dept. & Ors.
…
Mr.Ramchandra Wagh i/b Mr.Narayan Rokade for the
Petitioner.
Mr.A.I.Patel, Addl.G.P. with Ms.P.N.Diwan, A.G.P. for the
State/Respondent.
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE &
MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 17th JUNE, 2026
...
P.C:-
1. On hearing the learned counsel for the Petitioner, we ?nd
that under the guise of an innocuous prayer of deciding the
representation preferred by the Petitioner to the Deputy
Registrar, what the Petitioner is ultimately seeking is the stay
of the recovery proceedings initiated against him in
furtherance of the Recovery Certi?cate obtained by
Respondent No.4/Society-Shri Kulswami CO-Op. Credit Society
Ltd. under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Co-Operative
Societies Act, 1960 (for short, “Act of 1960”)
Admittedly the Petitioner has availed a loan of
Rs.50,00,000/- and term loan of Rs.40,00,000/-. Since he
2/3 5 WP-12894-25.odt
could not repay the loan amount, it resulted into the Recovery
Certi?cate being procured by Respondent No.4 on 30/12/2021.
The demand notices were issued to the Petitioner alongwith
the attachment notices. An order of attachment is also issued
by the Recovery Of?cer under Section 156(1) of the Act of
1960 read with Rule 107 of the Maharashtra Co-Op. Societies
Rules.
2. It is the claim of the Petitioner that he repaid the loan
amount in both the accounts, but still a notice was issued by
the Recovery Of?cer for handing over the possession of his
shop situated in a co-operative housing society, Vashi, Navi
Mumbai.
Being pitched against the dead wall, when the Petitioner
know that he cannot wriggle out of his liability either to make
the payment or his property being attached and sold for the
purpose of realization of the amount in the Recovery
Certi?cate, he rely upon the Government Resolution (G.R.)
dated 21/05/2025, which is issued by the Co-Operation
Department.
We have perused the said G.R. placed at Exhibit I to note
that in no case, does it any way assist the Petitioner. The said
G.R. is the policy decision taken by the State Government for
extending the scheme of settlement of the loan accounts by the
co-operative societies and though the learned counsel for the
Petitioner makes a bold statement that he is ready for one time
settlement, we expect him to place the said offer before
Respondent No.4/Society and it is open for the society to
consider the same. The Petitioner, therefore, cannot seek
3/3 5 WP-12894-25.odt
further postponement of the proceedings, which are legally
initiated against him by Respondent No.4.
3. The Petition is dismissed.
(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)
Checking your session…