Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2004(1)BomCR589; 2003(4)MhLj1043
..... 35 of the old act of 1984 and section 45 of the new act of 2002 read as under:'35. (1) the superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for and the conduct of elections of the members of the board of such multi-state co-operative societies or class of multi-state co-operative societies as the central government may by general or special order ..... provided that the term of the office of the board of directors shall be such as specified in the bye-laws of the multi-state co-operative society which shall not exceed three years from the date of election. by-law 29, however, provided such period to be five years. it is not in dispute that with effect from august 19, 2000, the multi-state co-operative societies act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the new act') came into force. sub-section (5) of section 45 of the new act provides that the term of the office of the elected members shall be such not exceeding five years from the date of election.3. section .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2007(5)ALLMR642; 2007(4)BomCR613; (2007)109BOMLR1005; 2007(1)GLR518
..... by sub-clause iii i.e. by virtue of a motion of no confidence at a meeting of the board of directors by a simple majority. 6. while the registration of the amendment sent by letter dated 17-6-2002 was pending for consideration of respondent no. 3-the central registrar, on 19-8-2002 the old act was repealed and the multi-state co-operative societies act, 2002 (new act, for short) came into force and the central registrar registered the bye-laws sent for approval not for 3 years as proposed by the respondent-bank but for 5 years and this, the central registrar did, as explained ..... by him in the reply filed, to bring into line with the provisions of the new act which by virtue of sub-section (5) of section 45 provided that the term of office of the elected members of the board should be not exceeding 5 years from the date of election, as may be specified in the bye-laws of the multi- state co-operative society .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR2004Bom166; 2004(1)ALLMR798; II(2004)BC585; 2004(1)BomCR707; 2004(1)MhLj704
..... for consideration is 'do the courts and authorities constituted under the maharashtra co-operative societies act 1960 (the 1960 act) and the multi-state co-operative societies act, 2002 (the 2002 act) continue to have jurisdiction to entertain applications/disputes submitted before them by the co-operative banks incorporated under the 1960 act and the 2002 act for an order for recovery of debts due to them, after establishment of a tribunal under the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions act, 1993. (the 1993 act)'.2. the events that led to the placing of all these petitions before us are that the shamrao vithal co-operative bank ltd., a scheduled multi-state cooperative bank, filed an application before the debts recovery ..... entry 44 the parliament can legislate also in relation to the co-operative societies, the object of which is not confined to one state and entry 45 confers exclusive powers on the parliament to legislate in relation to banking. it is an admitted position before us that the multi state co-operative societies act 1984 and multi-state co-operative societies act 2002 have been enacted by the parliament in exercise of its powers under entry 44. they provide for incorporation of co-operative societies, the object of which is not confined to one state. it is also an admitted position before us that the 1949 act as also the 1993 act have been enacted by the parliament in exercise of its .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2004(1)ALD532; 2004(1)ALT642
..... submit that under the multi state co-operative societies act, 2002 (2002 act), the bank is required to refer the matter to the arbitrator as per the provisions of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 and the order passed by the second respondent dated 28-8-2002 is unenforceable.5. learned standing counsel for the charminar bank, sri p.s. rajasekhar, placed reliance on section 126 of the 2002 act and submits that the award/order passed by the second respondent is enforceable and that the execution taken out under section 70 of the co-operative societies act is valid.6. multi state co-operative societies act, 1984 has now been repealed by multi state co-operative societies act, 2002 (2002 act). as per section 126 of the 2002 act, legal proceedings pending ..... before the court, central registrar or any other authority on the commencement of the act are to be continued before such authority or the court as if act of 2002 had not been passed. though proceedings were initiated under section 74 of the central act of 1984, by reason of section 126 of the 2002 act, it is permissible to the second respondent to continue the proceedings and issue an order. accordingly .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2003KAR4867
..... .n. 6058/2003 wherein the learned single judge has not interfered with notification dated 26.12.2002 (annexure-a), issued by the 1st respondent. as in both the appeals, common questions of law and fact are involved, they are taken up together.2. it is stated that the 2nd respondent is a society governed by multi-state co-operative societies act, 2002 (central act 39 of 2002) (for short 'the 2002 act'). earlier the act of 1984 was in force and it was replaced by the 2002 act. the management of the 2nd respondent -society is vested with the board of directors. the appellant - petitioner was elected as a member of the board of directors vide notification dated 22 ..... .01.2003 for a period of 3 years. being aggrieved by the issuance of notification dated 26.12.2002, issued by the state government, the appellant - petitioner filed the above writ petition challenging the nomination of the 3rd .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2005(4)ALD357
..... to filing of these writ petitions are :the petitioners in all these writ petitions are railway employees. there is a society called south central railway employees credit society limited, secunderabad, originally established in 1923 and registered under a.p. co-operative societies act no. 7 of 1964 (hereinafter referred to as society). subsequently, the said society came to be brought under the provisions of multi-state co-operative societies act, 1984, presently known as multi-state co-operative societies act, 2002, (hereinafter referred to as mscsa) since the operations of the society are spread over more than one state like karnataka, goa, andhra pradesh and maharashtra. the writ petitioners were elected as directors ..... of the society in the year 1999. their term of office expired on 30.6.2002. the disciplinary authority had issued individual charge memos on 10.5.2004 to the writ .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2007SC1584; 2007(3)ALT1(SC); [2007]137CompCas63(SC); JT2007(5)SC201; 2007(3)KLT302(SC); 2007(3)MhLj434; 2007(5)SCALE366; (2007)6SCC236; 2007AIRSCW2325; 2007(3)AIRKarR406
..... on his own motion or an application made to him by the aggrieved party. the multi-state co-operative societies act, 2002 ['the mscs act, 2002']14. the multi-state co-operative societies act, 1984 was enacted by the parliament and section 74 thereof deals with various disputes including recovery of debts due to the co- operative banks. parliament repealed the multi-state co- operative societies act, 1984 by the multi-state co-operative societies act, 2002 [''the mscs act, 2002''). the object of the mscs act, 2002 was to consolidate and amend the law relating to co-operative societies, with objects not confined to one state and serving the interests of members in more than one state, to facilitate the voluntary formation and democratic functioning of co-operatives as people's institutions based on self-help and mutual aid and to enable .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 125(2005)DLT45; 2005(85)DRJ183
..... of understanding (mou) dated 30.7.2002 containing an arbitration agreement.3. the multi-state co-operative societies act, 2002 came into force on 19.8.2002. section 29(a) of the said act provides that no person shall be eligible for being a member of a multi-state cooperative society if his business is in conflict or in competition with the business of such multi-state cooperative society, while section 43 & (k) of the act provides that no member of a multi-state cooperative society or a nominee of a member, society or national cooperative society shall be eligible for being chosen as, or for being, a member of the board of such multi-state co-operative society or a national co-operative society, or of any other co-operative society to which the multi-state co-operative society is affiliated, if such member has .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2007(95)DRJ618
..... rejected the submissions made on behalf of dr. g. jayakumar, petitioner therein that dr. kumaradas (petitioner herein) has functioned for more than two terms as president which was statutorily prohibited under section 44 of the multi state co-operative societies act, 2002. the court was of the view that the act of 1984 was amended with effect from 16th august, 2002 and the tenure of the office bearers was restricted only from such date. for this reason, it could not impact the present petitioner from continuing to hold the office. the court also relied upon the earlier order dated 27th january ..... which was filed before the high court of judicature at madras. by an order passed on 14th november, 2006, the court was of the view that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under section 84 of the multi state co-operative societies act, 2002 which provides a remedy of arbitration and that the petitioner was required to be relegated to such alternative remedy. the court also noticed that as the provisions of the arbitration & conciliation act, 1996 were applicable to the proceedings of the arbitrator, the petitioner had adequate remedy to seek interim relief. consequently, the writ petition was disposed of on 14th november, 2006 with the following directions .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2007)2GLR2204
..... . one of the principal grounds of challenge was lack of jurisdiction of respondent no. 1 as, according to the petitioner, respondent no. 1 could not have exercised jurisdiction under section 76b of the act, because the union was a multi-state co-operative society within the meaning of the multi-state co-operative societies act, 2002 (mscs act).11. vide order dated 09.10.2006 the said petition came to be disposed of by the high court with the following observations:3.1 in facts of this case, therefore, it is provided that the petitioner if prays for additional time to file reply to the show ..... cause notice, the same shall be granted. learned advocate shri patel submitted that the petitioner will file reply latest by 1st november, 2006.4. considering the contention of the petitioner that the concerned cooperative society being a multi-state cooperative society, action .....
Tag this Judgment!