SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1969 Supreme(Bom) 85

D.V.PATEL, M.G.CHITALE
Khanna C. P. – Appellant
Versus
V. K. Kalghatgi. – Respondent


JUDGMENT - Patel, J.

1. This is an application which the petitioner has filed even before the Officer on Special Duty has made any order under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and referred the dispute to arbitration as required by it for arresting the proceedings. In short the petitioner wants to smother any proceedings at all before the Officer on Special Duty and wants this Court to go into the question of merits without permitting the said Officer to apply his mind, to the proceedings.

2. Facts as alleged by the petitioner are as follows:

Respondent No. 5 is a member of the Society Respondent No. 4 and as such holds two flats Nos. 10 and 11 in the building of the Society. The petitioner says that respondent No. 5 agreed to transfer to him his interest in the flats, his share holdings etc., for Rs. 70,000 which he paid to him. The agreement is of March 1, 1967, They jointly gave intimation to respondent No. 4 and requested that the petitioner be admitted as member. The request was turned down. For building the flats loan was obtained from respondent No. 6 and instalments had to be paid. The petitioner paid the instalments f













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top