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

2006 Supreme(Bom) 424

N.V.DABHOLKAR, M.G.GAIKWAD
DALSING s/o SHAMSING RAJPUT – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – Respondent


Judgment

N. V. DABHOLKAR, J.

( 1 ) HEARD learned advocate Shri V. D. Hon, for the petitioner, learned AGP Shri Ghute Patil, for respondent Nos. 1 to 3, and learned advocate Shri V. B. Patil, for respondent No. 4. Respondent No. 5 is served and absent. He is absent in spite of specific directions vide our order dated 10-3-2006 asking him to remain present in person along with documentary evidence regarding his membership of the Society which is going to polls on 26-3-2006. After order dated 10-3-2006, the matter was on board on 14-3-2006. Even on that day, respondent No. 5 had not appeared. Today, neither respondent is present, nor he is represented by lawyer of his choice. Hence, we are dealing with the matter in the absence of respondent No. 5.

( 2 ) ADMITTEDLY, Shrikrushna Takli (Bk) Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari society Limited, Takli, Taluka Jamner, District Jalgaon is an ordinary Society (it is neither Specified Society nor Notified Society ). The election programme for the election of Managing Committee of the said Society is published by respondent No. 4 who is appointed as Election Officer by the resolution of the said Society. Copy of the election programme is at Exhibit-







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