SATISH CHANDRA, R. R. RASTOGI
MEERUT COLLEGIATE ASSOCIATION, MEERUT – Appellant
Versus
ARVIND NATH SETH – Respondent
( 1 ) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution involves the scope of the power of the prescribed Authority to pass an interim order pending reference made to it under Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, hereafter, the Act.
( 2 ) THE facts are these : Meerut Collegiate Association, petitioner No. 1, is a society registered under the Act. The Society runs and administers the Meerut College, Meerut The affairs of the college are looked after by an Executive Committee of the Society consisting of 33 members, out of whom 21 members are elected. The term of the Executive Committee is for three years and the last election of the Executive Committee of the Society was held on 19th Feb. , 1978 under bye-law 12 (a) of the Society. Thereafter fresh elections were held on 10th May, 1981. In that election Sri Raja Ram Mittal was elected President, Sri P. S. Rastogi Vice-President and Sri J. D. Singhal, Petitioner No. 2 the Honorary Secretary. Twenty-one members of the Executive committee as well were elected. Sri Arvind Nath Seth, respondent No. 1 and Sri Vishwa Nath agarwal, respondent No. 2, were also candidates for the posts of President and Honor
Babu Nandan v. Sub-Divisional Officer, Salempur
Income-tax Officer v. M.K.Mohammed Kunhi
B.B.L.and T.MerchantsAssociation v. Bombay State
Sarjoo Singh v. District Magistrate, Ballia; Baleshwar Dayal v. State of U.P.
Grindlays Bank Ltd. v. Central Government Industrial Tribunal
Asstt.Collector of Central Excise Calcutta v.National Tobacco Co.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.