Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.17 seconds)Ambalal Sarabhai vs Phiroz H. Antia on 6 July, 1938
The decision in 'Ambalal Saraohai v. Phiroz H. Antia', AIR (26) 1939 Bom 35, relates to a club. A member of the club had been expelled by a resolution of the members of the club. The requisition for the meeting gave no reasons whatever for the expulsion nor was there any correspondence between the plaintiff and the Managing Committee or Honorary Secretary or any member with respect to the reasons for the expulsion. The expelled member did not attend the meeting. The Court held that the action on the part of the members of the club offended against the elementary principle of natural justice and reason and Justified interference by a civil Court and the plaintiff was entitled to the relief claimed by him. This decision also does not really bear on the question to be decided. The question arose in a suit, the institution concerned is a Club and the expulsion made therein was contrary to all the principles of natural Justice.
Article 32 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 326 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 92 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
The Specific Relief Act, 1963
Laxmikant Shripat Bhandare vs C.R. Gerrard on 29 August, 1945
14. Another case which also throws much light on the question Is 'Lakshmikant Shripat v. C. R. Gerrard', AIR (34) 1947 Bom 193. In that case a young man named Lakshmikant Shripat Bhandare was a student of the J. J. School of Arts. He filed an application in the Bombay High Court under Section 45 of the Specific Relief Act and asked for an order directing the respondent who was a Director of the Institution to forbear from enforcing an order purporting to expel him from the J. J. School of Arts and from preventing the petitioner from attending the said school. The application was dismissed on the preliminary ground but the learned Judge proceeded to consider the other questions raised. At page 193, Blagden J., says:
1