2013 (2) TMI 432 - HC - Indian Laws

Condonation of delay of 58 days in filing the Revision Applications against the certificates issued u/s 101 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act at the behest of the Respondent No.3 society which claimed an amount of Rs.1,88, 289 which are the outstanding dues owed by the Petitioners and an amount of Rs.4,78,580 which are the outstanding dues owed by the Petitioners - Held that - Petition is required to be allowed and the delay of 58 days in filing the Revision Applications deserves to be condoned as from the facts which have come on record, there can be no dispute about the fact that the Director of the Petitioners was not keeping well and as contended by him was suffering from chest pain. The undergoing of the stress test by the Director of the Petitioners is a pointer to the fact that he was undergoing treatment for heart ailment. The fact that the report of the stress test does not disclose that the Director of the Petitioners required any further treatment, would not go against the case of Petitioners whilst seeking condonation of delay of the said 58 days, as the fact remains that the Director of the Petitioners had undergone a stress test. The revisional authority has proceeded on an erroneous assumption that every day s delay has to be explained by the Petitioners. The concerned authority to hear the Revision Applications on merits and in accordance with law. The Petitioners to pay costs of Rs.3,000/to the Respondent No.3 society in each of the above Petitions within a period of two weeks from date and file evidence of the same before the revisional authority.

Summary

Issues:
Condonation of delay in filing Revision Applications under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act.

Analysis:
The High Court of Bombay heard the case involving the rejection of applications for condonation of delay in filing Revision Applications against certificates issued under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. The Petitioners sought to challenge recovery certificates issued by the Respondent No.3 society for outstanding dues. The Petitioners, after obtaining certified copies of the recovery certificates, filed Revision Applications under Section 154 of the Act, depositing 50% of the certificate amount with the society. However, the Revision Applications were belated by 58 days, prompting the Petitioners to file applications for condonation of delay citing the ill health of their Director during the relevant period.

The Learned District Deputy Registrar rejected the applications for condonation of delay, stating that the Petitioners failed to provide justification for each day's delay. The Petitioners contended that the Director's ill health, as evidenced by a stress test, warranted condonation of the delay. The Court noted that the Director's health condition, supported by medical evidence, justified the delay. It emphasized that parties should be allowed to pursue their remedies on merits rather than being dismissed on technical grounds. The Court held that the rejection of the applications was based on an erroneous assumption and quashed the impugned orders, condoning the delay of 58 days.

The Court directed the office of the revisional authority to number the Revision Applications upon the Petitioners' deposit of the balance amount within four weeks. It instructed the authority to hear the applications on merits and in accordance with the law. Additionally, the Court ordered the Petitioners to pay costs to the Respondent No.3 society and file evidence of payment within two weeks. Failure to comply would nullify the benefits of the order, allowing the Respondent to take further legal action against the Petitioners. The Court made the rule absolute, with each party bearing their respective costs of the Petitions.