Rajasthan High Court
SAW/722/2026 of THE DAUSA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, DAUSA Vs SATISH CHAND SHARMA SON OF SHRI BADRI PRASAD SHARMA on 20 August 2026
2026:RJ-JP:33354
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 722/2026 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9244/2019 CNR: RJHC020536372026 | URN: SAW / 1534U / 2026 The Dausa Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Dausa, Through Its Managing Director. ----Appellant Versus 1. Satish Chand Sharma
[2026:RJ-JP:33354-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 722/2026
in
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9244/2019
CNR: RJHC020536372026 | URN: SAW / 1534U / 2026
The Dausa Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Dausa, Through Its Managing Director.
----Appellant
Versus
1.
Satish Chand Sharma Son Of Shri Badri Prasad Sharma, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Ganga Vihar Colony, Behind Rawat Palace, Somnath Nagar, Dausa, Rajasthan.
2.
The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur
----Respondents
For Appellant(s)
:
Mr. Ram Kumar Sharma
For Respondent(s)
:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA
Order
20/08/2026 Delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Counsel for the appellant submits that the issue involved in this appeal has been considered and decided by the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of The Dausa Cooperative Bank Limited Vs. Gyan Chand Gupta (D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.719/2026) wherein on 23.07.2026, the following order was passed:- “1. The appeal has been filed against the order dated 18.02.2026, which appears to be a consent order, as even now learned counsel for the appellant agrees that the issue has been
Page 1 of 2
[2026:RJ-JP:33354-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-722/2026] decided in the case of Amar Singh vs. The Jalore Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. Through Managing Director and Anr.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6996/2014 and squarely covers the facts of the present case too. However, his contention is that the benefit which was awarded in the case of Amar Singh (supra) to the concerned writ petitioners has already been awarded to the writ petitioner in the present case.
2. We do not find any such averments being made by the appellants before the Learned Single Judge and on the other hand, we do not find that the representation made by the writ petitioner was rejected by the appellants.
3. It is also informed by the counsel appearing as caveator that one of the writ petitioner has already been granted the benefit. We expect that the same benefit shall be extended to the other writ petitioners.
4. Thus, the order passed by the learned Single Judge does not warrant any interference and the appeal is wholly misconceived and the same is dismissed with a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be deposited by the appellant with the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jaipur.” In that view of the matter, this appeal stands dismissed in view of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of The Dausa Cooperative Bank Limited (supra). (SANDEEP TANEJA),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J 29/JYOTI
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…