Bombay High Court
ED COOPER PREMISES CO OP. SOC. LTDversusDIVISIONAL JOINT REGISTRAR AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Rejected
- Bench
- SANDEEP V MARNE
Holding
The Court held that there is no valid reason to interfere with the Deputy Registrar’s order granting membership and dismissed the writ petition.
Summary
The petition challenged the order of the Divisional Joint Registrar dismissing a revision of an application for transmission of membership in a co‑operative society. Respondent No. 3 sought membership of Gala No. 37 after his father’s death, produced NOCs from his siblings, but one brother later claimed the NOC was not issued, leading the society to refuse admission. The Deputy Registrar had earlier granted the membership, but the petitioner failed to produce the order, rendering the petition defective. The Court held that the society should not intervene in the private dispute over title between the brothers and that a mere grant of membership does not confer ownership of the unit. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed, leaving the title issue to be determined by a civil court.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable despite the petitioner’s failure to attach the Deputy Registrar’s order.
- Whether the High Court can interfere with the Deputy Registrar’s order granting membership in a co‑operative society.
- Whether a co‑operative society can adjudicate a title dispute between members or must leave it to a civil court.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 — s. 23(2)
Subjects
- Co-operative Societies
- Membership Transmission
- Title of Unit
- Civil Court Jurisdiction
- Revision Application
- Writ Petition
- Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act
Judgment
2026:BHC-AS:28412
Renuka 18-WP-8340-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 8340 OF 2026
ED Cooper Premises Co Op. Soc. Ltd ...Petitioner
V/s.
Divisional Joint Registrar and Ors ...Respondents
________________
Mr. Ram Upadhyay a/w Mr. Santoshkumar Dube i/b Law Competere
Consultus for Petitioner.
Mr. A. A. Alaspurkar, AGP for Respondent No. 1 and 2-State.
Mr. Prashant D. Jadhav with Ms. Madhusmita Sahu for Respondent No. 3.
________________
CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATED: 10 JULY 2026.
P.C.:
1) The petition challenges order dated 2 February 2026 passed
by the Divisional Joint Registrar dismissing Revision Application No. 486
of 2018 and con<rming the order dated 5 December 2018 passed by the
Deputy Registrar under Section 23(2) of the Maharashtra Co-operative
Societies Act, 1960.
2) I have heard Mr. Upadhyay, the learned counsel appearing
for Petitioner, Mr. Alaspurkar, the learned counsel appearing for
Respondent No. 1 and 2, and Mr. Jadhav, the learned counsel appearing
for Respondent No. 3.
3) It appears that Respondent No. 3 had applied for
transmission of membership in respect of Gala No. 37 after death of his
Page No.1 of 3
10 JULY 2026
Renuka 18-WP-8340-2026
father. He had apparently produced NOC of his two brothers and one
sister. It appears that one of the brothers later on submitted application
to the society contending that he had not issued the NOC. Acting on that
communication of the brother, the Petitioner-society refused to admit
Respondent No.3 as its member. Upon Appeal preferred by Respondent
No. 3, the Deputy Registrar has passed order dated 5 December 2018
granting membership in favour of Respondent No. 3. The Petitioner has
failed to produce copy of order dated 5 December 2018 passed by the
Deputy Registrar. In that sense, the Petition as <led is defective.
4) Even if the defect in the Petition is momentarily ignored, I
do not otherwise <nd any reason to interfere in the impugned order of
the Divisional Joint Registrar. The dispute is between Respondent No. 3
and his brother. Society has no cause to intermingle in that dispute.
Once the NOCs were produced before the society, the society ought to
have effected transfer of membership. The affected brother did not <le
proceedings challenging the order of the Deputy Registrar. The society is
unnecessarily litigating in dispute between the two brothers. It is well
settled position that mere grant of membership in a Society does not
amount to conferring of title in respect of a unit. If the brother of
Respondent No. 3 has claim of title in respect of the Gala, he is free to
secure a declaration to that effect from an appropriate Court. Society’s
membership records can be brought in tune with declaration of title
made by the Civil Court.
5) In view of the above position, I do not <nd any valid reason
to interfere in the impugned order.
Page No.2 of 3
10 JULY 2026
Renuka 18-WP-8340-2026
6) Writ Petition is accordingly rejected. Issue of title is left
open
[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]
Signed by: Renuka S Thakur
Page No.3 of 3
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge 10 JULY 2026
Date: 13/07/2026 15:57:08
Checking your session…