Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.26 seconds)Section 15 in The Gujarat Co-Operative Societies Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 12 in The Gujarat Co-Operative Societies Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 17 in The Gujarat Co-Operative Societies Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 155 in The Gujarat Co-Operative Societies Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Icici Bank Ltd. vs Umakanta Mohapatra on 5 October, 2018
5. The learned advocate Mr. B.T. Rao appearing on
caveat for the respondent No.3 vehemently objected
the very maintainability of the petitions on the
ground that the alternative efficacious remedy under
section 155 of filing revision application before the
State Government was available the petition. To
substantiate his submission, Mr.Rao has relied upon
the decisions of the Supreme Court in case of
Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore and
Another Vs. Mathew K. C., reported in (2018) 3 SCC 85
and in case of ICICI Bank Limited and Others Vs.
Umakanta Mohapatra and Others, reported in (2019) 13
SCC 497. Mr.Rao, taking the Court to the provisions
contained in the said Act, more particularly to the
Sections 12, 13, 17 as well as the relevant Rules
framed under the said Act, submitted that the
Assistant District Registrar, Cooperative Societies,
while granting the amendments in the byelaws of the
petitioners Societies, had not taken into
consideration the provisions of Section 12 with
Page 3 of 8
Downloaded on : Wed Aug 26 04:38:07 IST 2020
C/SCA/9843/2020 ORDER
regard to the classification of the societies,
inasmuch as for conversion of the societies from one
class to the other, the procedure as required to be
followed under Section 17(2) was not followed.
Mr.Rao submitted that the procedure for amendment in
byelaws has been prescribed under Section 13 read
with Rule 6 of the Rules, whereas the procedure with
regard to change in the name of the societies is
prescribed in Section 15 read with Rule 8 of the said
Rules, and that the petitioners Societies had failed
to follow the said procedures separately.
Lekhamba Gopalan Ane Samudayik ... vs State Of Gujarat & 4 on 8 August, 2016
To
substantiate his submissions, Mr.Rao has heavily
relied upon the decision of the Division Bench in
case of Lekhamba Gopalan Ane Samudayik Sahakari
Mandli Limited Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in
2016(0) AIJELHC 236117.
Authorized Officer, State Bank Of ... vs Mathew K.C. on 30 January, 2018
5. The learned advocate Mr. B.T. Rao appearing on
caveat for the respondent No.3 vehemently objected
the very maintainability of the petitions on the
ground that the alternative efficacious remedy under
section 155 of filing revision application before the
State Government was available the petition. To
substantiate his submission, Mr.Rao has relied upon
the decisions of the Supreme Court in case of
Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore and
Another Vs. Mathew K. C., reported in (2018) 3 SCC 85
and in case of ICICI Bank Limited and Others Vs.
Umakanta Mohapatra and Others, reported in (2019) 13
SCC 497. Mr.Rao, taking the Court to the provisions
contained in the said Act, more particularly to the
Sections 12, 13, 17 as well as the relevant Rules
framed under the said Act, submitted that the
Assistant District Registrar, Cooperative Societies,
while granting the amendments in the byelaws of the
petitioners Societies, had not taken into
consideration the provisions of Section 12 with
Page 3 of 8
Downloaded on : Wed Aug 26 04:38:07 IST 2020
C/SCA/9843/2020 ORDER
regard to the classification of the societies,
inasmuch as for conversion of the societies from one
class to the other, the procedure as required to be
followed under Section 17(2) was not followed.
Mr.Rao submitted that the procedure for amendment in
byelaws has been prescribed under Section 13 read
with Rule 6 of the Rules, whereas the procedure with
regard to change in the name of the societies is
prescribed in Section 15 read with Rule 8 of the said
Rules, and that the petitioners Societies had failed
to follow the said procedures separately.
1