Mohit Bhardwaj v. Splendor Complex Co Op Housing Society Ltd 15 Others

appl-256.16 pmw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL (L.) NO.256 OF 2016 IN NOTICE OF MOTION (L.) NO.1793 OF 2016 IN SUIT (L.) NO.635 OF 2016 Mohit Bhardwaj ... Appellant

Versus

Splendor Complex Co-op.

Housing Society Ltd. And Ors.

... Respondents ------------ Mr. Mohit Bhardwaj Appellant in person.

Mr. H.S.S.Mohanty a/w Mr. Thomas Janes i/by Avris Legal for the Respondent No.1.

Mr. V.S. Kapse a/w Mr. Upendra Mahadik i/by Fast Track Legal for the Respondent Nos.2 to 7, 9, 10 and 13.

CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.A. SAYED, JJ.

DATE : 18th JULY, 2016 P.C.

.

Not on board. Taken on board.

Heard the Appellant appearing in person. The order impugned is an ad-interim order dated 4th July, 2016. Paragraph 1 of the impugned order reads thus :- "1.

On 18th April, 2015, the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, has rejected the Application filed by the Defendants seeking cancellation of registration of the Plaintiff's Society. The Defendants thereafter, filed a Revision Application before the Minister of Co-operation

appl-256.16 being Revision Application No.855 of 2015 impugning the said order dated 18th April, 2015. The said Revision Application too is now rejected by the Minister of Cooperation. In view thereof, the Defendants are restrained by an order and injunction from writing any letters to any third party and/or members of the Plaintiff's Society stating that the registration of the Plaintiff's Society is illegal."

Paragraph 2 shows that the Notice of Motion for interim relief is fixed for hearing on 25th July, 2016. As of today, the application made by the Appellant for cancellation of registration of the Plaintiff Society stands rejected. Therefore, we do not find any error in the discretionary ad-interim order passed by the learned Single Judge. Needless to add that the injunction granted against the Appellant does not prevent the Appellant from filing appropriate proceedings for challenging the orders passed by the Authorities under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 arising out of Application for cancellation of the registration. Therefore, subject to what is observed above, no case for interference is made out with the discretionary and equitable ad-interim relief granted by the learned Single Judge. Subject to what is observed above, the Appeal is dismissed. Pending Notice of Motion do not survive. (A.A. SAYED, J ) (A.S. OKA, J )