1 of 3 13-wp-13786-22 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 13786 OF 2022 Raja Shreepal Co-Op. Housing Society ..Petitioner Versus Shri Shreepal Nagar Jain Swetamber Murtipujak Upashraya Trust. ..Respondent __________ Mr. Sunny Shah i/b. Ashish Suryavanshi for Petitioner. Mr. N. N. Bhadrashete for Respondent No.2. __________ CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATE : 04 NOVEMBER 2025 PC : 1. The present petition challenges the order dated 21 May 2022 passed by the Co-operative Appellate Court. By the said order, the Appellate Court allowed the appeal filed by the disputant and permitted him to carry out internal repairs at his own cost. 2. The record shows that the Co-operative Court, in its earlier order, had recorded a clear finding that the disputant was not a member of the petitioner society. Despite this finding, the Co- operative Appellate Court granted the relief in favour of the disputant without setting aside or even examining that finding. The Appellate Court also did not determine the issue of the disputant’s membership status before granting such permission. Gokhale VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Digitally signed by VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Date: 2025.11.04 17:37:32 +0530 2 of 3 13-wp-13786-22 3. Such a course of action is contrary to settled legal principles. Once a finding has been recorded that a person is not a member of the society, no consequential relief flowing from rights of membership can be granted without first determining that question. The foundation of any right within a co-operative society arises from valid membership. Unless the status of membership is conclusively decided, no incidental or derivative relief can be granted. The Appellate Court, therefore, ought to have confined itself to the question of membership before granting any substantive relief. 4. However, during the course of hearing, both sides fairly stated that the repairs, as permitted by the Appellate Court, have already been carried out by the disputant. Since the work stands completed, it would serve no practical purpose for this Court to reopen the legality or validity of the order at this stage. 5. Nonetheless, it is necessary to clarify that the disputant shall not derive any benefit or advantage in relation to membership from the observations or directions made in the Appellate Court’s order. The question regarding his membership shall remain open and will be decided independently by the Co- operative Court during the trial on its own merits and evidence. 6. With this clarification, the petition stands disposed of. It is further directed that if the repairs, which were permitted, have not been completed in accordance with the order of the Appellate 3 of 3 13-wp-13786-22 Court, the petitioner society shall be at liberty to take appropriate steps or pursue its legal remedies in accordance with law. (AMIT BORKAR, J.)