- (1.) HEARD counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS matter has earlier been adjourned at least on three occasions to ascertain the fact as to whether the petitioner -society was interested in making a suitable offer for purchase of six flats in question which are supposed to be auction sold by the respondent Bank. The petitioner had approached this Court for quashing the Memo No. 28 dated 10th February 2012 which was related to finalization of sale made in favour of the respondent no. 6 in respect of Flat No. B04/08 situate at Phase -II, Baridih, belonging to the petitioner society. Further prayer has also been made for a direction upon the respondent no. 5 -Registrar, Cooperative Society, Jharkhand to look into the matter and supervise the auction which is going to be held by the respondent no. 3 -Auction Officer -cum -Senior Manager, Singhbhum District Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Chaibasa.
(3.) COUNSEL for the respondent Bank has appeared and filed their counter affidavit. It is stated on his behalf that the flat in question has already been auction sold on price of Rs. 10.95 lakhs on 30th January 2012. It further appears from the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner that they have made a categorical statement at para -5 that the petitioner and / or its members will not have any objection if the remaining six flats are auction sold at any rate for recovery of the loan amounts due against the petitioner -society however, with the condition that the amount fetched after auctioning, should be treated as full and final settlement of the outstanding loan of the petitioner society. 6. In view of the aforesaid statement, it therefore appears that the petitioner are not interested in purchase of the flats being auction sold for realization of the outstanding dues of the respondent Bank. However, if the loan of the respondent Bank are satisfied on account of auction sale of the flats in question, learned counsel for the respondent Bank fairly submits that the property would be unencumbered and the needful would be done thereafter. However, he submits that if the outstanding dues are not fully recovered, it would be open to the respondent Bank to take other steps, as may be available in law. 7. In such circumstances therefore, the main prayer in the writ application relating to quashing of memo dated 10th February 2012, so far as it relates to finalization of sale made in favour of the respondent no. 6 in respect of Flat No. B04/08 belonging to the petitioner society, no longer subsists. Therefore, the writ petition has been rendered infructuous and is accordingly disposed of. Consequently, I.A. No. 3302/13 also stands disposed of. Petition disposed of.;