Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (1.23 seconds)
Documents citing Rai Sahib Ramdayal Ghasiram And Sons vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh on 5 November, 1959

Manohar P. Kharkhar And Another vs Raghuraj And Another on 18 September, 1981

76. The public inconvenience in the invalidity of the appointment of the Managing Director of such a Corporation is as great as in the case of any public servant. The Supreme Court in this very case has affirmed the ratio of the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court In I.R. Sons v. State of A.P., . The question in the said case was whether the acts of the members of the Market Committee, a statutory Corporation of the same nature of which respondent No. 2 happens to be in the present case, were valid when election of some of the members of the Market Committee was found to be invalid. The de facto doctrine was made applicable the acts and omissions of such directors of the acts and omissions of such directors of even the Market Committee.
Bombay High Court Cites 46 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

A.I. Manie, Merchant, Kokkalai And Anr. vs State Of Kerala And Anr. on 3 April, 1962

In Ramdayal Ghaslram and Sons v. Govt. of Andhra Pradesn, 1960-11 STC 705: (AIR 1960 Andh Pra 502), the petitioner acting as the agent of a non-resident Bombay company for taking delivery of goods purchased in Hyderabad, used to pay the price, take delivery and store the same on behalf of the company. He had a first charge on the goods for the amounts advanced on behalf of the buyers. He had thus authority to handle the goods and to deal with them by taking delivery and storing. In the above two cases also, the petitioners were held to be agents under the provisions which correspond to Section 18 of the Act.
Kerala High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Delhi State Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs Jagdish Singh And Ors. on 19 February, 1992

(9) The other point raised by the counsel is that even assuming but without admitting that if at all the Arbitrator had come to the finding that the Board of Directors was not properly constituted in that event the action or the acts of the Board of Directors could not be deemed to be invalid in view of the provisions of Section 34 of the Cooperative societies Act, 1972 and also on the principle of defacto doctrine. Reliance has been placed on the decisions of I.R. Sons vs State of Andhra Pradesh and on Gokaraju Rangaraju vs State of Andhra Pradesh . The last submission made by the counsel is that the Arbitrator had been directed by this court on 21.1.85 to decide the dispute raised by the claimant in accordance with the Act and the Rules. He could not have granted the relief of reinstatement as claimed by the claimant respondent No. 1. Without prejudice to the contention of the petitioner the counsel submitted that if this court is of the view that the writ petition cannot be allowed then in view of the fact that respondent No. 1 has to retire on 31.1.1994 and since 27.1.1991 he has been out of work so such relief of reinstatement would not be proper. Respondent No. 1 has already received Rs. 3,56,128.56 since the date of termination from the bank. Reliance has been placed on the decisions reported in the Labour Law Reporter 1991 page 824 and 1992 (1) J.T. 188 and .
Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 5 - Full Document
1