902-WP-3781-2026.odt rajshree IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3781 OF 2026 Sarina Esmeralda Lopez ....Petitioner V/S State of Maharashtra ....Respondent Ms.Sarina Lopez, Petitioner in person. Mr.Milind More, Addl. GP a/w Ms.Madhura Deshmukh, AGP for the State. Mr.Sean Wassoodew a/w Mr.Surya Das for Respondent No.4. CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE & ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ DATE : 27th AUGUST 2026 P.C. : 1 The Petitioner in person, is a Member of Respondent No.3- The Wahedna Cooperative Housing Society, of which Respondent No.4, Neville Gomes was alleged to be the Secretary. But, we are informed that for a considerable length of time, the Society was under the control of the Administrator and thereafter, on the elections being held the Managing Committee is in place. 2 On hearing the Petitioner in person, we have perused the order passed under Section 79(3) of the Maharashtra Co- operative Societies Act, 1960 by the Deputy Registrar, Co- 1/5 RAJSHREE KISHOR MORE Digitally signed by RAJSHREE KISHOR MORE Date: 2026.08.29 18:06:14 +0530 902-WP-3781-2026.odt operative Societies, on 26/08/2016. The said order came to be passed since there was default in complying with the directions issued under Section 79(1) of the Act of 1960, as the directions issued vide letter dated 30/04/2014, for furnishing to the Petitioner, the documents sought by her under Section 32 of the Act of 1960 was not complied with and as the Society failed to comply with the directions issued under Section 79(1) of the Act of 1960, and thereby disregarded the Registrar’s order, an Authorized Officer was appointed under Section 79(2) of the Act of 1960 and upon following the procedure, the power under sub-section (3) of Section 79 of the Act of 1960 was invoked directing the Chairman/Secretary(Respondent NO.4) of Wahedna CHS Bandra (West) to pay a sum of Rs.100/- into the funds of the Society, for each day of default for the period from 30/04/2014 until compliance is made with the directions. 3 It is pointed out to us by Ms.Lopez that the said order was upheld in an Appeal and finally put to rest by the order passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(St) No.3134/2021, when the challenge to the order passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar Co-operative Societies dated 13/05/2020 failed, as the application for condonation of delay was not accepted and the learned Single Judge upheld the said finding and recorded that the Authority under the Act was justified in rejecting the Application for condonation of delay and Writ Petition was accordingly dismissed. In light of this, it is the submission of Ms.Lopez that the order passed under Section 79(3) of the Act of 1960 has attained 2/5 902-WP-3781-2026.odt finality and it is imperative for the Chairman and Secretary of the Society to ensure its compliance. 4 We have no doubt in our mind that if the order has attained finality, it definitely deserve compliance. However, the Petitioner has approached this Court with rather a strange relief viz. restraining any proceedings being filed under Bye-Law No.174(A). When we attempted to find out as to what are the proceedings arising of, it is brought to our notice that on 14/02/2026 the Co-operative Housing Society addressed a notice to Mr.Neville Gomes, (Respondent No.4 to the Petition) and this notice seek deposit of his share of outgoing and charges due and payable to the Society, and it is issued in his capacity as occupant of Flat NO.102 of the Society and it categorically state that his share of charges including the contribution to the maintenance charges and the major building repairs for the building and all other charges and penalties as decided by AGM/SGM/Registrar if applicable, is outstanding and this amount is computed as Rs.5,22,990/- as on 13/02/2025. The notice is accompanied with last three bills for perusal of the noticee and we find that these are charges payable towards maintenance and vehicle parking charges alongwith penalty imposed for its delayed payment. The notice is qua the amount due and payable by Respondent No.4 in his personal capacity as a Member of the Society and has nothing to do with the liability that has been fastened upon him as a Secretary of the Society, in the wake of the order passed by the Deputy Registrar on 26/08/2016 by 3/5 902-WP-3781-2026.odt invoking sub-section (3) of Section 79 of the Act of 1960 and we find that the proceedings which Respondent No.4 has filed before the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies on 23/02/2026 seek quashing of the notice dated 14/02/2026 and a prayer is made to direct the Society to stop levy of additional penalty on the Society bills of the Applicant. 5 A copy of the Application is placed on record at Page 39, and we find that while raising a grievance about the amount that is demanded, the Applicant has categorically made a statement that he has already paid a sum of Rs.1,92,000/- towards recovery certificate amount and had deposited Rs.44,000/- in this Court and paid further amount towards penalty, but this penalty cannot run for indefinite time. On perusal of the Application filed by Respondent No.4 to the Deputy Registrar, we can only observe that if the remedy is available to him he can invoke the same and ultimately the Deputy Registrar of Societies will take cognizance of the grievance. However, we must clarify that the amount which is due and payable by him in his capacity as a Secretary of the Society, in the wake of the exercise of the power under Section 79 of the Act of 1960 and which has attained finality is not liable for any intervention as the order passed by the Deputy Registrar clearly stipulated that an amount of Rs.100/- per day shall be paid/deposited with the Society till the amount is fully realized. We, therefore, clarify that while the Deputy Registrar adjudicate the application filed by Mr. Gomes (Respondent No.4) being aggrieved by the notice dated 14/02/2026, it will not have 4/5 902-WP-3781-2026.odt any impact upon the order under Section 79(3) of the Act of 1960, which has already attained finality. If the amount is already deposited with the Society, no further liability shall be incurred by him, but if it is not so done, then the penalty as well as other liability shall continue to be paid. With this clarity, Writ Petition is disposed of. [ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J.] [BHARATI DANGRE, J.] 5/5