NARAYAN KRISHNARAO SAWANT Vs. MANOHAR JYOTIRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition seeks to impugn the judgment and order dated 17th February, 1987 passed by the Maharashtra State co-operative Appellate Court in what is described as Unregistered Appeal No, 256 of 1985. The petitioner is not n party to the said Appeal. He has sought to challenge the said order in the following circumstances.

(2.) ELECTIONS to the respondeiu No. 3 Bank were held on 4th November, 1985 The petitioner and respondent No. 1 contested. In the results that were deelared on 7th November 1985 respondent No. 1, who had secured eleven votes as against the eight votes secured by the petitioner, was declared elected. The petitioner filed Election Petition No. 1 of 1986 before the respondent No. 4, the Additional Commissioner and the same is pending. It is the case of the petitioner in the said Election Petition that respondent no. 1 was a defaulter surety to respondent No. 5 Bank and was consequently disqualified for contesting the election. According to the petitioner, in a dispute liled by respondent No. 5 being Case No, ABN/877/1001 of 1977 an award was passed on 24th February, 1978 for a sum of Rs. 47,957. 98 Ps. The said Award was passed against the principal borrower and the sureties. Respondent No. I was one of the sureties. In view of the Award, respondent no. 1 was disqualified to contest the said election.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 1 soon after the filing of the aforesaid petition i. e. on 9th November, 1985 sent a notice to respondent No. 5 contending that he had not signed the surety papers. On 22nd November, 1985 respondent no. 1 preferred what was styled as Unregistered Appeal No. 256 of 1985 before the Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court seeking to impugn the Award dated 24th February, l978 in ABN/877/1001 of 1977, Respondent no. 1 in the Appeal contended that he had not been served in the said proceedings and consequently the Award was not binding upon him. He further contended that he had aot signed the necessary surety papers and was not a valid surety. He was unaware of the Award till a few days prior to the filing of the Appeal. He, therefore, prayed for condonation of delay in filing the Appeal and for setting aside the Award.