Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

DIGAMBAR VISHWANATH WADE AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARSHTRA THR ITS COOPERTIVE DEPT AND ORS

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the Division Joint Registrar to decide the pending appeal and stay application promptly and restraining the auction for two weeks.

Summary

The petitioners, Digambar Vishwanath Wade and others, challenged the rejection of their application under Section 98 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. While the petition was pending, Respondent No.2 issued an order under Section 88 on 24 February 2025 and an appeal under Section 152 was filed before the Division Joint Registrar, along with an application for a stay. The petitioners argued that the respondents were proceeding with an auction of their agricultural property, which would cause them serious prejudice. The Court held that, given the pending appeal and stay application, it would not entertain the writ petition further at this stage. It directed the Division Joint Registrar to decide the appeal and the stay application expeditiously and ordered that the auction not be finalized for two weeks from 12 January 2026. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of.

Issues considered

  • Whether the writ petition should be entertained when an appeal and stay application under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act are already pending.
  • Whether interim relief restraining the auction of the petitioners' agricultural property should be granted.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • civil writ
  • stay order
  • auction
  • cooperative societies act
  • interim relief
  • appeal under Section 152

Judgment

                                                                                  54. WP 13781 of 2025.doc




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                    CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 13781 OF 2025

                       Digambar Vishwanath Wade and
                       Ors.                                                   ...Petitioners

                                  Vs.

                       The State of Maharashtra Thr.
                       Its Cooperative Dept and Ors.                          ...Respondents

                                                      *****
                            Adv. Chetan S. Damre a/w Advocate for the
                            Adv. Omkar S. Banbe      Petitioners
                            Smt. T.N. Bhatia           AGP for the Respondent-
                                                       State

                                                        *****
                                         CORAM :           M. S. KARNIK AND
                                                           S. M. MODAK, JJ.

                                         DATE      :       8th JANUARY 2026

                       P. C. :-

                       1.      We are informed that during the pendency of the petition,

                       proceeding under Section 98 of the Maharashtra Co-operative

                       Societies Act, 1960, is already decided, by rejecting the application of

                       the Petitioners. The Petitioners are in the process of challenging those

          Digitally
          signed by    orders. However, so far as, the proceedings in respect of the order dated
SEEMA     SEEMA
          KSHITIJ
KSHITIJ   YELKAR
          Date:
YELKAR    2026.01.09
          13:24:08
          +0530

                       Seema                                                                         1/3
                                                             54. WP 13781 of 2025.doc




24th February 2025 passed by the Respondent No. 2 under Section 88,

Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 are concerned, an appeal

is preferred under Section 152 before the Division Joint Registrar. In

that appeal, the application for stay has been filed.

2.      In view of the subsequent development, we do not propose to

entertain the present petition at this juncture, as the appeal and

application for stay have already been filed. However, learned counsel

for the Petitioners submits that Respondents are in the process of

completing the auction in respect of agricultural property belonging to

the Petitioners. This will cause serious prejudice to the Petitioners.

3.      Since the application for stay has already been filed before the

Division Joint Registrar, we are requesting the Division Joint Registrar

to decide the said appeal as well as the application for stay

expeditiously.

4.      So far as the application for stay is concerned, we direct the

Division Joint Registrar to consider the question of granting ad-

interim/interim relief within a period of two weeks from the date of

communication of this order. Petitioners are at liberty to apply in case

of difficulty.

Seema                                                                           2/3
                                                            54. WP 13781 of 2025.doc




5.      The learned counsel for the Petitioners undertakes to produce

copy of this order before the Division Joint Registrar on Monday at

11.30 a.m..

6.      For a period of two weeks from Monday i.e. 12 th January 2026,

the auction sale not to be finalized, which will be subject to any order

passed by the Division Joint Registrar or by Competent Forum in the

application for stay.

7.      With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of.



 (S. M. MODAK, J.)                               (M. S. KARNIK, J.)




Seema                                                                          3/3


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.