The Gandhi Bhuvan Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. v. the Divisional Joint Registrar and Ors.

Bombay HC28 Jan 2008WP/3117/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge court set aside an order under Section 79 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act directing membership admission. The court dismissed writ petitions challenging another order regarding membership due to insufficient facts on review grounds, accepting prior record findings.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 24.3.2004 under Section 79 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act set aside; Writ Petitions dismissed.

WRIT PETITION NO. 3117 OF 2006 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3115 OF 2006 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3116 OF 2006 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3118 OF 2006 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3119 OF 2006 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3120 OF 2006 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3121 OF 2006 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3122 OF 2006 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3123 OF 2006 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3124 OF 2006

the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai, upholding the order of the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai, directing the petitioners society to admit 11 members on common grounds.

2. Apparently, there are two orders passed in this regard, one is passed on 24.3.2004 under Section 79 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. The contention of the petitioners society is correct that the Divisional Joint Registrar had no jurisdiction to give directions regarding the membership to the society under Section 79. Nothing to the contrary has been shown on behalf of the respondents. The said Order is therefore hereby set aside.

petitioners contention regarding the validity of the order dated 30.1.2006 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar upholding the order of the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Authorities under the Act had no jurisdiction to deal with the question of membership of 11 members since those members had not made any application initially to

contention would have been correct but if the facts supported it. However, there is no support in fact for the said contention. Before the Deputy Registrar, the petitioners society admitted that it had received application from the 11 members, and, therefore, the Deputy Registrar directed membership to be given since the other requirements were fulfilled. The petitioners society then challenged this finding before the Divisional Joint Registrar and even contended that it had not made any such statement before the Authority below. However, Divisional Joint Registrar also confirmed the said finding of fact. There has been no attempt by the society to pray for review of the order on the ground that no such statement had been made. In these circumstances, the record of the Authorities must be accepted as true. There is no merit in the petitions, which are hereby dismissed.

The Gandhi Bhuvan Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. v. the Divisional Joint Registrar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Gandhi Bhuvan Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. v. the Divisional Joint Registrar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Parvesh Mehra Vs Fakirchand Mehra and Ors.

Parmanand Patel and Anr. Vs Sudha Chowgule and Ors. and Indu P. Patel

Parmanand Patel and Anr. Vs Sudha Chowgule and Ors. and Jaya Parmanand Patel

Sudhir Yashwant Patil Vs Tarabai Anant Patil and Ors.

Anil Shankarrao Lokare Vs Territory Manager - Bharat Petroleum Corporation and Anr.

Attmaram Laxman Waingankar Vs Shantabai Gopal Waingankar and Anr.