Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: section 91 mcs act in M/S.Vilas Transport Co vs Sangli Sahakari Bank Limited on 4 October, 2011Matching Fragments
27] Finding that the application that was made by the petitioner was itself untenable and not maintainable in law and no orders of the nature that have been sought could have been passed therein, the petition fails and is dismissed.
28] The judgements that have been cited before me by Mr.Jain are of no assistance to him. One of them is reported in 2004(4) Mh.L.J. 1093 (Vasant Jobanpurtra Vs. Bank of India Staff Sampada Co-operative Housing Society Ltd & Ors). There all that the learned Single Judge was considering was the distinction between a proceeding under section 91 of the MCS Act and the nature of the jurisdiction and powers that are conferred on the Registrar or his nominee under section 101 of the MCS Act. True it is that the proceedings are quasi judicial in nature but this Court has clarified that they will retain their summary character. It is not as if a elaborate enquiry has to be wp1657-11.doc conducted and, therefore, if the observations relied upon by Mr.Jain are taken into account, far from supporting the petitioners, they would lend support to the conclusion recorded by me hereinabove.