Sou. Rashmi Ramesh Saykhedkar And ANR v. Shridhar Patwardhan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO2986 OF 2024 Rashmi Ramesh Saykhedkar & Anr.

....Petitioners

Versus

Shridhar Patwardhan & Anr.

....Respondents Mr. Sanjay Kshirsagar, for Petitioners.

Mr. Shridhar Patwardhan, (Party in person) for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.

CORAM: SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.

DATE : DECEMBER 9, 2025 ORDER :

1.

This Petition essentially challenges an order passed in Revision Application on December 5, 2023, by which Respondent No.1 has been permitted to participate in the proceedings before the Co-operative Court.

2.

The facts are in a very peculiar framework. Respondent No.1 is a Former Chairman of the Society. At the time when the Society was placed under administration, the Society was being represented by Respondent No.1 as its Chairman. The administrator took objection to Digitally signed by AARTI GAJANAN PALKAR Date:

2025.12.15 12:49:21 +0530 Respondent No.1 having any role in the proceedings. The request of AARTI GAJANAN PALKAR

Respondent No.1 to be allowed to personally intervene in his individual capacity as a member of the society did not meet with success in the Learned Co-operative Court. Thereafter, on the filing of the Revision Application, the Revisional Authority held in favour of Respondent No.1 permitting him to participate in the proceedings. 3.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner fairly states that there is a subsequent development which needs to be brought to the attention of the Court. In subsequent elections, Respondent No.1 has again been elected and is now the Chairman of the Society, and is authorized to represent the Society in all the proceedings connected with the underlying matter before the Co-operative Court. 4.

In these circumstances, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner fairly states that this petition has been rendered infructuous and therefore would not be pressed.

5.

Therefore, without disturbing the Impugned Order, the Petition is finally disposed of without any direction on the premise that it is infructuous. It is not appropriate to still adjudicate and return a finding on the Impugned Order on the hypothesis of what could happen if Respondent No. 1, in a future development, ceases to be Chairman yet again.

6.

The Co-operative Court is requested to adjudicate the matter as expeditiously as possible and expedite the matter within the constraints of its roster.

7.

All actions required to be taken pursuant to this order shall be taken upon receipt of a downloaded copy as available on this Court's website.

[ SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.]