<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2003 (4) TMI 572 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176082</link>
    <description>Rule 25 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 1973, the society bye-laws and the binding settlement restricted membership and allotment to persons who were not already disqualified by prior rehabilitation allotments or ownership of residential property in Delhi, including disqualifying interests of specified family members. Non-disclosure of such facts in affidavits and membership papers supported rejection of claims where the disqualification was proved. Once expulsion was set aside by the competent authority, the members&#039; original seniority had to be restored and could not be altered by later events or subsequent demands. Mere deposit of money, without a formal application and required affidavit, did not by itself establish valid membership.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2015 17:01:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=408589" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (4) TMI 572 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176082</link>
      <description>Rule 25 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 1973, the society bye-laws and the binding settlement restricted membership and allotment to persons who were not already disqualified by prior rehabilitation allotments or ownership of residential property in Delhi, including disqualifying interests of specified family members. Non-disclosure of such facts in affidavits and membership papers supported rejection of claims where the disqualification was proved. Once expulsion was set aside by the competent authority, the members&#039; original seniority had to be restored and could not be altered by later events or subsequent demands. Mere deposit of money, without a formal application and required affidavit, did not by itself establish valid membership.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176082</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>