Apr - High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

486 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2011
similar arguments have been repelled. He
further submits that the respondent no. 1
is a society which is governed by section
34 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act,
1965 and recovery by issuing a
certificate under section 95-A is fully
permissible. He submits that execution of
certificate under section 92 is
permissible for which limitation is 12
years. He submits that petitioner has not
made any repayment of loan after
payment of two amounts of Rs. 11,925
and 6,166/- in the year 2001 and 2002.
He further submits that the land of the
petitioner being less than 3.125 acre, it
cannot be sold due to the Government
Order dated 27.9.2007 which prohibits
auction of land of less than 3.125 acre.
He submits that the land of the petitioner
cannot be sold hence, the Bank has no
option except to proceed under section
95-A the 1965 Act.
5. We have considered the
submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and hae perused the record.
6. The principal submission which
has been pressed by Sri Awadhesh Pratap
Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner
is that 1964 Act and the Rules framed
thereunder provides a specific procedure
for recovery hence, the recovery by
issuance of certificate under section 95-A
of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act,
1965, is not permissible. He submits that
when a statute provides a manner of
doing a particular thing, the said thing
can be done in the above manner only
and doing of thing by another manner is
prohibited. 1964 Act provides procedure
for realization of its loan. In the present
case, stand taken by the respondents is
that recovery had been initiated in
accordance with Section 95-A of the
U.P. Cooperative Societies Act,1965
which procedure is permissible, as the
respondent no. 1 is a registered
cooperative society within the meaning
of U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965.
The above issue which has been raised in
the writ petition, was considered by a
Division Bench of this Court in the case
of Sukh Lal (supra). It is relevant to
extract relevant discussions in this
regard. The Division Bench in Sukh
Lal's case repelled the above submission
after considering the provisions of 1964
Act and U.P. Cooperative Societies Act,
1965. Following was laid down by the
Division Bench in the aforesaid case:
"The U.P. Sahkari Gram Vikas
Banks Act, 1964 has been enacted to
facilitate the working of Sahkari Gram
Vikas Banks in the State of Uttar
Pradesh. Section 2(j) provides that Uttar
Pradeshs Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank
means a cooperative society registered
under the Cooperative Societies Act.
Section 2(j) is quoted below:-
"2(j). Uttar Pradesh Sahkari Gram
Vikas Banks means a cooperative society
registered under the Co-operative
Societies Act for the time being in force
in Uttar Pradesh with its area of
operation covering the whole of Uttar
Pradesh and carrying on the business as
a Gram Vikas Bank and facilitating the
operation of its members;"
7. From the materials brought on
the record including the mortgage deed
(Annexure-1 to the writ petition), it is
clear that the Uttar Pradesh Sahkari
Gram Vikas Bank Limited is a registered
society under the Cooperative Societies
Act, 1912. According to Section 131 of
the 1965 Act any cooperative society