Authority: Supreme Court of India

Order Date: 09-09-2026

Case Overview

  • Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 22407/2026 filed by SEVA SAHAKARI SANSTHA M against AVADHOOT & ORS., arising from the impugned final judgment and order dated 22-06-2026 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad (WP No. 5642/2026).
  • The High Court had held the petitioner disqualified from casting his vote in the election of the Committee of Management of Nanded District Central Co‑operative Bank because, by the cut‑off date, the petitioner had not paid all interest dues that became payable after that date.
  • The petitioner challenges the disqualification, contending that the definition of a “defaulter” under the Maharashtra Co‑operative Societies Act, 1960 and the associated Rules requires a service of notice of demand, which was not satisfied.
  • Central legal question: Whether a member is deemed a defaulter under sub‑section (10) of Section 27 of the Maharashtra Co‑operative Societies Act, 1960 without a prior notice of demand, and how the term “defaulter” is defined under the Act and its Rules.

Court Observations & Directions

1. The Court reiterated that sub‑section (10) of Section 27 of the 1960 Act disqualifies a defaulter member from being a voter.

2. The Court noted that the precise point at which a member becomes a defaulter—particularly whether a notice of demand is a prerequisite—needs detailed examination.

3. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned for four weeks to enable the petitioner’s counsel to scrutinise the relevant statutory provisions and Rules to determine when a member is considered a defaulter.

4. The Court observed that, despite the interim order, the petitioner had participated in the election. It therefore directed the petitioner to seek instructions regarding the margin of victory between the elected candidate and the runner‑up.

5. The Court ordered that the matters be listed immediately after the expiry of the four‑week adjournment.

Final Outcome

  • No substantive ruling on the merits was issued; the case was adjourned for four weeks with specific directions to the petitioner to clarify the defaulter definition and to provide details on the election margin.

Topics: Co‑operative Banking, Election Disqualification