REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

KUSHAL S/O BAPURAO PAWAR Appellant

V/S

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

KARVENAGAR SGR SANSTHA MARYADIT VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
VEENA KUMARI TANDON VS. NEELAM BHALLA AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
N P PONNUSWAMI THE UNION OF INDIA AND STATE OF MADHYA BHARAT VS. RETURNING OFFICER NAMAKKAL CONSTITUENCY NAMAKKAL SALEM DIST :RETURNING OFFICER NAMAKKAL CONSTITUENCY NAMAKKAL SALEM DIST [REFERRED TO]
JAMUNA PRASAD MUKHARIYA VS. LACHHI RAM [REFERRED TO]
K M NANAVATI VS. STATE OF BOMBAY NOW MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
R L ARORA VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SANGHVI JEEVRAJ GHEWAR CHAND INDIAN TELEPHONE INDUSTRIES LIMITED VS. SECRETARY MADRAS CHILLIES GRAINS AND KIRANA MER CHANTS WORKERS UNION:THE WORKMEN [REFERRED TO]
CO OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LIMITED VS. ADDITIONAL INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
BABAJI KONDAJI GARAD BABASAHEB RAJARAMJI DAMPURIKAR VS. NASIK MERCHANTS CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD [REFERRED TO]
GIRDHARI LAL AND SONS VS. BALBIR NATH MATHUR [REFERRED TO]
ANUKUL CHANDRA PRADHAN ADVOCATE SUPREME COURT VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
A JITENDERNATH VS. JUBILEE HILLS COOP HOUSE BLD SOC [REFERRED TO]
KULDIP NAYAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAJA RAM PAL VS. SPEAKER LOK SABHA [REFERRED TO]
MALABAR HILL CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD VS. K L GAUBA [REFERRED TO]
DINKAR PANDURANG PATIL VS. CHIKALI VIVIDH KARYAKARI SOCIETY LTD [REFERRED TO]
UTRANE VIVIDH KARYAKARI SEVA SAHAKARI V SOCY LIMITED VS. LAXMAN DALPAT PATIL [REFERRED TO]
PANDIT R JAGTAP VS. RETURNING OFFICER TARUKHEDLE VIVIDH KARYAKARI SAHAKARI VIKAS SOCIETY LTD [REFERRED TO]
MACHINDRANATH BANDU KALE VS. SATALI V K S SOCIETY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
DADARAO S O APPARAO KHATKE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
BHAJANDAS GOREKH BHUIRKAR VS. DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY SHIVAJI KOKATE VS. DIVISIONAL JOINT REGISTRAR CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES NASHIK [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY D JADHAV VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Noticing difference of opinion on the construction of Section 73-C(3) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, hereinafter referred to as the Act, the learned Division Bench has placed this matter before the Honble the Chief Justice for reference to a larger Bench for consideration of the following questions.

(2.) Before we turn to the arguments, we may refer to the judgments based on which the learned Division Bench felt it necessary to refer the dispute for consideration by the Full Bench. The issue arose from construction of the provisions of Section 73-C(3) of the Act. The relevant sub-section reads as under:

(3.) This view was reiterated by another Division Bench in Pandit R. Jagtap and Ors. v. The Returning Officer, Tarukhedle Vividh Karyakari Sahakari (Vikas) Society Ltd. and Ors., 1997 CTJ 5 as also thereafter in Machindranath Bandu Kale and Ors. v. Satali V.K.S. Society Ltd. and Ors., 1998 5 BCR 928. It may be noted that in all the three judgments of the learned Division Benches, admittedly the bye-laws did not provide for separate constituencies and restriction on the voting rights of members. This view was also followed by another learned Single Judge in Dadarao Apparao Khatke v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., 2002 CTJ 724

Click here to view full judgment.

KHUHAL BAPURAO PAWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address