Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.25 seconds)

Gadchiroli Zilla Sahakari Krushi And ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 16 January, 2003

28. Though reliance has been placed by learned AGP on Chandrakant Jagannath Ghodke (supra) and on Gadchiroli Zilla Sahakari Krushi and Gramin Bahu-Udeshiya Development Bank Ltd. (supra) both of which hold that the provisions of Section 102(1) of the MCS Act, do not contemplate any pre-decisional hearing before the passing of an order for appointment of an interim liquidator, it is however necessary to note that even in these decisions, it has not been held that the principles of natural justice are not applicable.
Bombay High Court Cites 29 - Cited by 50 - R S Mohite - Full Document

Chandrapur Zilla Sahakari Krushi And ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors., Etc. on 1 August, 2003

01. WP 1978 of 2023.odt 44 financial inputs. This stand changes the contextual background in which Section 102(1) of the MCS Act, has to be viewed and applied, for when the State itself intends the survival of the societies, the subsequent judgments in Chandrapur Zilla Sahakari Krushi and Gramin Bahuudeshiya Development Bank Ltd. and Dughganga Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Maryadit (supra) merely recognise this by holding that the principles of natural justice are available to the Societies even at the stage of Section 102(1) of the MCS Act before the order of appointment of interim liquidator is made.
Bombay High Court Cites 29 - Cited by 62 - R J Kochar - Full Document
1   2 Next