https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193852 The Maharashtra depositor-protection law was held to operate in a field distinct from the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and the Companies Act, 1956, because it targets fraudulent defaults by financial establishments through attachment and criminal consequences, while the central statutes regulate banking and corporate winding up. Mere overlap in definitions or incidental trenching did not create repugnancy or displacement, and the proceedings under the State Act were maintainable. The Court also treated the earlier Supreme Court ruling on similar depositor-protection legislation as covering legislative competence and occupied field, and left individual responsibility and the effect of winding up to be raised before the Special Court. en-us Fri, 23 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Jul 2025 12:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193852 The Maharashtra depositor-protection law was held to operate in a field distinct from the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and the Companies Act, 1956, because it targets fraudulent defaults by financial establishments through attachment and criminal consequences, while the central statutes regulate banking and corporate winding up. Mere overlap in definitions or incidental trenching did not create repugnancy or displacement, and the proceedings under the State Act were maintainable. The Court also treated the earlier Supreme Court ruling on similar depositor-protection legislation as covering legislative competence and occupied field, and left individual responsibility and the effect of winding up to be raised before the Special Court. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 23 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193852