Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose out of recovery proceedings under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, initiated by Sanjivani Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha, Satara Branch, against respondent No.1, Vithal Maruti Bhosale, for a defaulted loan of Rs.5,80,000. A recovery certificate dated 03.02.2009 was issued under Section 101 of the Act. The mortgaged properties of respondent No.1 were attached on 11.05.2010 and 20.09.2010. The Special Recovery Officer obtained permission to sell the attached properties and fixed the upset price on 28.03.2014. On 01.04.2014, a proclamation of sale was issued by affixing it in the officer’s office and the Taluka office, stating that the auction would be held on 03.05.2014. A public notice was also published in a newspaper on 27.04.2014. Hanumant Pandurang Deshmukh participated in the auction along with three other bidders and was declared the successful bidder. He deposited the full auction price. Respondent No.1 was given an opportunity to deposit 5% of the outstanding amount to prevent confirmation of the sale, but he failed to do so. The District Deputy Registrar confirmed the sale and issued a Sale Certificate on 29.06.2015. Prior to this, on 24.02.2015, respondent No.1 had filed Revision Application No.75 of 2015 without impleading the auction purchaser. By a common order dated 16.12.2015, the Divisional Joint Registrar allowed the revision and set aside the auction and sale certificate on the ground that there was non-compliance of Rule 107(11)(e) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961. This order was challenged by the auction purchaser and the society/recovery officer through four writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The main legal issues were: whether the revision application was maintainable under Section 154 in the absence of an order under Rule 107(14)(1), whether the requirement of 30-day notice under Rule 107(11)(e) was satisfied, and whether the auction purchaser was entitled to be heard before the auction was set aside. The petitioners argued that the revision was not maintainable as no order under Rule 107(14)(1) had been passed, that the proclamation by affixing notice in the office 30 days before the auction complied with the rule, and that the impugned order violated principles of natural justice. The judgment text did not include the court’s final analysis and decision, but the matter was heard and judgment reserved on 25.02.2020, pronounced on 12.08.2020.
Headnote
A) Cooperative Societies - Revision Application - Maintainability - Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, Section 154; Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961, Rule 107(14)(1) - Revision application against auction sale not maintainable when no order under Rule 107(14)(1) was passed; aggrieved person must avail remedy under Rule 107(14) within 30 days from auction - Held that Divisional Joint Registrar could not have entertained the revision without such an order (Paras 5-6). B) Cooperative Societies - Sale Proclamation - Compliance with Rule 107(11)(e) - Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961, Rule 107(11)(e) - Proclamation of sale by affixing notice in the office of Recovery Officer and Taluka office at least 30 days before the sale satisfies the rule; subsequent newspaper publication is additional and not a ground to find non-compliance - Held that the auction was not vitiated by any irregularity in publication of proclamation (Paras 6). C) Cooperative Societies - Auction Sale - Rights of Auction Purchaser - Principles of Natural Justice - Impleadment in Revision - Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, Section 154 - Setting aside auction sale without impleading the successful auction purchaser violates principles of natural justice - Observing that the revision order set aside the sale certificate without the auction purchaser being heard (Paras 5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Divisional Joint Registrar's order setting aside the auction sale and sale certificate is legal, valid, and proper; whether the revision application was maintainable under Section 154 without an order under Rule 107(14)(1); whether there was non-compliance of Rule 107(11)(e) regarding proclamation of sale.
Law Points
- Rule 107(11)(e) requires proclamation of sale by affixing notice in office of Recovery Officer and Taluka office at least 30 days before sale
- and mere absence of newspaper publication does not vitiate sale
- Revision under Section 154 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act
- 1960 not maintainable absent an order under Rule 107(14)(1)
- Aggrieved person must file revision under Rule 107(14) within 30 days from date of auction
- not after sale confirmation.
