Bombay High Court
KAVITA PRAKASH LAKAREversusSHRI BALASAHEB SATBHAI MERCHANTS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD KOPARGAON THROUGH LIQUIDATOR AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The writ petition is disposed of, with the petitioner directed to seek relief, if any, in the pending execution proceedings.
Summary
Kavita Prakash Lakare filed a writ petition challenging an attachment order issued by Shri Balasaheb Satbhai Merchants Co-operative Bank Ltd. The petitioner claimed that the land in dispute was transferred to her before the bank obtained an order under Section 88 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, and that the attachment was motivated by her relationship with a former director. The bank contended that the transfer was a ploy to deprive the society and evade payment. The court held that any grievance against the attachment order must be raised in the pending execution proceedings, not through the writ petition. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of, leaving the matter open for further relief in the execution proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether the transfer of land prior to an order under Section 88 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act renders the attachment order invalid.
- Whether the petitioner can challenge the attachment order through a writ petition or must do so in the execution proceedings.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- land transfer
- attachment order
- Section 88
- cooperative societies
- execution proceedings
- writ petition
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:23791
941-WP-13652-2017.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
941 WRIT PETITION NO. 13652 OF 2017
Kavita Prakash Lakare
VERSUS
Shri Balasaheb Satbhai Merchants Co-operative Bank Ltd Kopargaon
Through Liquidator And Another
...
Mr. Umakant Deshmukh for the Petitioner.
Mr. N. R. Bhavar for Respondent No.1.
Mr. M. S. Shaikh for Respondent No.2.
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 12 JUNE 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.
2. Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that before
passing the order under Section 88 of the Maharashtra Co-operative
Societies Act, 1960, the land was transferred in the name of the Petitioner
and the attachment order was passed only because the Petitioner is the
daughter-in-law of the erstwhile Director. He further submits that the
substantial amount has already paid by the Petitioner. If is for the Petitioner
to file all the record before the executing Court.
3. Per contra Mr. Bhavar, learned counsel for Respondent No.1 submits
that in fact during the pendency of proceedings under Section 88, with an
intention to deprive the society and get away to pay the amount, the transfer
was effected.
Shubham Page 1 of 2
941-WP-13652-2017.doc
4. Considering the above, now execution proceedings are pending. If the
Petitioner is aggrieved by the attachment order, the Petitioner is at liberty to
file application in the said execution proceedings. If such application is filed,
the Court to consider the same in accordance with law.
5. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. All points are
kept open.
[SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.]
Shubham Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…