Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9783 (RAJ)

MILENDRA AGARWAL v. J C COOPER BANK AND ORS

CW/5184/2008 · 2025-04-04

Mahendar Kumar Goyal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:15303] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5184/2008 Milendra Agarwal Son Of Late Shri Rajendra Prasad Ji Agarwal, aged about 43 years Resident Of Sr-3, Acharya Vinoba Bhave Nagar, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The Jaipur Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Through Its General Manager. 2. Branch Manager, Jaipur Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Choura Rasta, Jaipur. 3. Recovery Officer, Jaipur Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Choura Rasta, Jaipur. 4. The State Of Rajasthan Through Secretary Cooperative Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Peush Nag For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ram Kumar Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Order 04/04/2025 This writ petition is directed against the demand notice dated 12.02.2018 issued under Rule 94(5) of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Rules, 2003 which is a part of Chapter 12 of the Rules meant for execution of the awards, decrees, orders or decisions. Indisputably, the subject demand notice has been issued pursuant to order dated 08.11.2002 passed by the competent authority under Section 99 of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act, 2001 which is not subject matter of challenge in the writ petition in absence whereof, validity of the demand notice issued pursuant [2025:RJ-JP:15303] (2 of 2) [CW-5184/2008] thereto cannot be examined by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. So far as prayer no.2 with regard to redetermination of the actual amount due to the petitioner is concerned, again, in absence of challenge to the order passed under Section 99 of the Act of 2001, this prayer too cannot be entertained. Resultantly, this writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merit. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J PRAGATI/37