- (1.) THE petitioner Bank advanced a sum of Rs.85 lacs to M/s M.D. Process, Pali on 2.3.2006. THE creditor M/s M.D. Process, Pali also availed financial assistance from the Pali Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Pali and the Rajasthan Financial Corporation. On having defaults, the Pali Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Pali attached the mortgaged property and proceeded for its auction as per the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Rules, 2003 (for short 'the Rules of 2003' hereinafter), a notification, thus, was issued on 11.8.2010. THE petitioner Bank challenged the notification aforesaid by way of filing a revision petition as per provision of Section 107 of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act, 2001 (for short 'the Act of 2001' hereinafter) before the Additional Registrar, Cooperative Societies. An application seeking interim relief too was filed. THE application aforesaid was dismissed on 12/8/2010 and revision petition is fixed for further proceedings on 17/8/2010. THE instant writ petition is preferred to challenge the order dated 12/8/2010 passed by the Additional Registrar rejecting the application for interim relief.
(2.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has advanced huge amount to M/s M.D. Process, therefore, the first charge on mortgaged property is of the petitioner. A reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of Pali Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Pali with a specific assertion that as per document Ex.-R/7, the respondent Bank will first satisfy the advanced amount of the petitioner Bank and then of Rajasthan Financial Corporation and then of itself. The relevant portion of the document Ex.-R/7 reads as under:- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... Heard learned counsel for the parties. It is not in dispute that the revision petition preferred by the petitioner before the Additional Registrar as per provision of Section 107 of the Act of 2001 is yet pending and same is listed before the competent authority on 17.8.2010. The instant petition for writ is only against the interlocutory order. It is also pertinent to note here that the respondent Bank in quite unambiguous term conveyed the petitioner Bank that the amount advanced by the petitioner Bank shall be first satisfied from the amount availed on sale of mortgaged property. In such circumstances, no interference of this Court as desired is warranted. The petition for writ is accordingly dismissed.;