PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA
Madhya Pradesh Cricket Association, Indore – Appellant
Versus
B. S. Solanki – Respondent
Prakash Shrivastava, J.:-
This order will also govern the disposal of W. P. Nos.7723/2012, 7727/2012, 7728/2012, 7729/2012, 7736/2012, 7742/2012, 7743/2012, 7744/2012, 7745/2012, 7746/2012, 7751/2012, 7754/2012, 7755/2012, 7756/2012, 7757/2012, 7769/2012, 7770/2012, 7771/2012, 7772/2012, 7969/2012 and 7970/2012, since it is stated by learned counsel for both the parties that all these writ petitions involve the same issue on the similar fact situation.
2. These writ petitions have been filed against the order of the Assistant Registrar dated 27-7-2012, by which the Assistant Registrar has held that the membership granted by the Petitioner M.P. Cricket Association (MPCA) to its new members between the period 2008-09 to 2011-12 was contrary to its registered bye-laws and was void. W. P. No. 7742/2012 is at the instance of MPCA whereas the other connected writ petitions are at the instance of aggrieved members of MPCA.
3. For convenience, facts have been noted from W. P. No. 7742/2012 filed by the MPCA.
4. The petitioner is a society registered under the M.P. Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973 (Act No. 44 of 1973) (for short “the Act”). It had inducted certain members between t
Bahadursinh Lakhubhai Gohil Vs. Jagdishbhai M. Kamalia and others
Commissioner of Police, Bombay Vs. Gordhandas Bhanji
Hari Narayan Sakya Vs. State of M.P. and others
Hukam Chand Shyam Lal Vs. Union of India and others
Mariamma Roy Vs. Indian Bank and others
Mohinder Singh Gill and another Vs. Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and others
Ram Phal Kundu Vs. Kamal Sharma
Shrawan Kumar Jha Vs. State of Bihar, Ram Sewak Sharma
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.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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.