SANGEETA K. VISHEN
Bhuj Mercantile Co-Operative Bank Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Gujarat State – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ jurisdiction under article 226 invoked. (Para 3) |
| 2. factual background of merger proposal. (Para 4) |
| 3. petitioner's arguments regarding jurisdiction. (Para 5) |
| 4. respondent's counterarguments on jurisdiction. (Para 6) |
| 5. further argument by respondent no.3. (Para 7) |
| 6. court's analysis of provided sanctions. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 7. discussion of statutory provisions. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 8. review of implications of the amendment. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 9. determination of substantive versus procedural law. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 10. final rejection of the petition. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 11. final decision on the rejection of amalgamation petition. (Para 37) |
JUDGMENT :
(Sangeeta K. Vishen, J.)
With the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
2. Issue Rule, returnable forthwith. Mr Siddharth Rami, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent no.1. Mr Ravindra Shah and Mr Amar Bhatt, learned advocates waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3 resepectively.
3. The petitione
Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) – I
A. R. Antulay v. Ramdas Sriniwas Nayak and others reported in (1984) 2 SCC 500
Aligarh Muslim Unversity v. Mansoor Ali Khan reported in (2000) 7 SCC 529
Canara Bank v. A.K. Awasthy reported in (2005) 6 SCC 321
Desh Bandhu Gupta & Co. & Others v. Delhi Stock Exchange Association reported in (1979) 4 SCC 565
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation v. S.G. Kotturappa reported in (2005) 3 SCC 409
M/s. Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise
State of Kerala and Others v. Mar Appraem Kuri Company Limited
Thirumalai Chemicals Limited v. Union of India reported in (2011) 6 SCC 739
The Registrar's jurisdiction to approve bank amalgamations remains valid despite the amendment of Section 44A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, with amendments not affecting ongoing merger request....
An appeal against the order of amalgamation of co-operative banks approved by the RBI is barred under Section 79 of the Chhattisgarh Co-operative Societies Act.
Integration of co-operative banks requires compliance with statutory procedures; the failure to follow mandatory provisions invalidates the amalgamation process.
The compulsory amalgamation of cooperative banks must comply with the provisions of the Jharkhand Cooperative Societies Act, 1935, including obtaining prior approval from the Reserve Bank of India, a....
Merger of cooperative banks does not violate statutory regulations when properly sanctioned; the petitioner acted out of self-interest and lacking standing.
The directives issued by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) under Section 110A(1)(iii) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (MCS Act) are mandatory and binding on the Registrar of Co-oper....
The winding up of a cooperative bank, governed by specific provisions, does not violate constitutional rights, ensuring the interests of depositors are prioritized.
Point of Law : Section 74A of 1969 Act was incorporated to ensure that benefits of DICGC Act, 1969 were extended to Co-operative Banks as well.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.