1 By way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :
"(A) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction by quashing and setting aside the impugned order dtd. 13.02.2009 passed by the Member, Board of Nominees and Joint Registrar, Co.operative Societies, Anand below application Exh. 16 & 20 in Summary Lavad Case No. 317 of 2008 at Annexure 'A' & 'B' and judgment & order dtd. 11.08.2011 passed by the Gujarat State Co.operative Tribunal at Ahmedabad in Revision Application No. 90 of 2009 at Annexure C and further be pleased to grant conditional leave to defend by ordering/directing the defendant nos. 1,2,4,6,7 & 8 to deposit at least 33% of the principal outstanding claim amount of Rs.1,04,30,288/- and to pass a decree, as prayed for, against defendant nos. 3 & 5.
(B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition this Hon'ble Court be pleased to stay the operation, implementation & execution of the impugned order dtd. 13.02.2009 passed by the Member, Board of Nominees and Joint Registrar, Co.operative Societies, Anand below application Exh. 16 & 20 in Summary Lavad Case No. 317 of 2008 at Annexure 'A' & 'B' and Judgment and Order dtd.11.08.2011 passed by the Gujarat State Co.operative Tribunal at Ahmedabad in Revision Application No. 90 of 2009 at Annexure C and further be pleased to grant application for leave to defend at Exh. 16 & 20 in Summary Lavad Case No. 318 of 2008 by ordering/directing the defendant nos. 1,2,4,6,7 & 8 to deposit at least 33% of the outstanding claim amount of Rs.1,04,30,288/- and further be pleased to pass a decree, as prayed for, against defendant nos. 3 & 5.
(C) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant any such other and further reliefs deemed just and proper in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case and in the interest of justice."
2. This Court vide order dated 22.11.2011 was pleased to pass the following order :
"Notice returnable on 7.12.2011.
Considering the facts involved in the matter, the Court may take up the matter for final disposal. Direct service is permitted."
3. In response to the above order Mr. Dhaval C. Dave, learned Senior Counsel with Mr. P.A. Jadeja appears for respondent nos. 1,2,3,7 & 8 and Mr. Pradeep Patel appears for respondent No.4 and Mr. J.A. Adeshra, learned Advocate for petitioner seeks permission to delete respondent no.5 from the present proceedings only. Mr. Adeshra further submits that as per the information of the petitioner-Bank, respondent no.5 has migrated to U.S.A.
4. Heard learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the respective parties. During the course of arguments, consensus has arrived at between the parties' Counsels appearing for the respective parties as under :
"[a] Order impugned passed in Lavad Suit No. 317 of 2008 dated 13.2.2009 whereby the respondents
- original defendant nos. 1,2,6 & 8 were given conditional leave to defend the suit on payment of Rs.25,000/- by 26.3.2009 as well as order dated 13.2.2009 whereby the similar order giving conditional leave to defend to respondent no.4 - original defendant no.4 was granted on condition to deposit Rs. 25,000/- by 26.3.2009 as well as order passed in Revision Application No. 90 of 2009 by Gujarat State Co.operative Tribunal dated 11.8.2011 i.e. Annexures 'A', 'B' & 'C' to the petition are hereby quashed and set aside.
[b] Learned Board of Nominees, Anand is hereby directed to rehear the application for leave to defend by respective respondents herein-original defendants after affording opportunity of hearing to all the parties on its own merits on the basis of the material on record of Lavad Suit No. 317 of 2008.
[c] It would be open for the respective parties to produce any further material within a period of fifteen days from today and the same shall be taken into consideration in accordance with law by the learned Board of Nominees while deciding the application for leave to defend filed by the respective respondents-original defendants.
[d] The Board of Nominees shall decide such application latest by 31.3.2012.
5. It is however, made clear that the above order is passed on consensus arrived at between the parties as recorded hereinabove. This Court has not examined the matter on merits. The Board of Nominees is directed to hear, decide and dispose of the application for leave to defend filed by the respondents-original defendants without being influenced by the present order in accordance with law as directed by this Court.
6. With this observation, the petition stands disposed of. Notice discharged with no order as to costs.
Sd/-
(R.M.
Chhaya, J.) M.M.BHATT Top