Whether section 70 of the Act. allow the MC to close the account of Mumbai bank or Maharashtra state co .op. Bank?
?MC shifted the banking from Maharashtra Rajya Sahkari bank to Saraswat co.op.bank without informing Dy. Registrar. All fd’s were also moved to this bank.Is it permissible as per law ?
? Can MC withdraw all Fixed deposits simply on remarks made by Auditor to reallocate the amount of all FD reconciling the same with figures of balance sheet.Was it not mandatory for MC to call SGM &take the permission for the same .
? MC brought the resolution to spend Sinking fund for repair the building. When Auditor objected they again maintained the Sinking fund to old figure.I know for certain that around 8 lacs were spent on repair on the strength of resolution which states that all the power to call quotation & awarding the repairing job be given to managing committee. Is this resolution valid as per law ?Can we recover said 800000/- from MC ?
?One efforts of Redevelopment (through Builder) by this committee was stopped by we 6 members.MC appointed the PMC When 75% majority was not there .All such expenses amounting to not less than 1,50000/- can we recover from MC ?
? Inquiry under 89 A is initiated against MC & I wish to know how above points will be helpful for me ?
Please guide me.
MC has lodged the complainant against me to Dy.Registrar alleging me, had beaten one of the member in past .Hence i should not be allowed to participate in inquiry otherwise they will not cooperate in said inquiry.
I C Naik
1.Section 70 of the MCS Act 1960 and Rules 54 and 55 of the MCR 1961 are meant to regulate Investment and Deposit of the Society Funds not needed for time being for the purposes they are collected or earmarked. Liquidating these investments are not intended to be regulated under these.
2.In shifting funds from one cooperative bank to another the Society does two things. Liquidate an Investment or withdraw deposit which has nothing to do with the Registrar’s office For investing or depositing in Saraswat co-operative Bank compliance of clause (d) of Section 70 needs to be ensured: “(d) in any co-operative bank other than those referred to in clause (a) of this section or banking company, approved for this purpose by the Registrar, and on such conditions as the Registrar may from time to time impose; “ In 1963 cooperative banks were added besides the banking company which required approval of the Registrar. Approval to deposit funds in any cooperative bank is not intended.
3.Bye Law No 113 provides that “The management committee Subject to the direction given or regulation made by a meeting of the general body meeting of the Society, the Committee shall exercise all powers, expressly conferred on it and discharge all functions entrusted to it under the bye-law No. 137.”
4.Bye Law No 137 has function of the management committee at item 3 which empowers it to consider all matters under Bye Law No 15 i.e. Investment of funds. So special general body meeting is not necessary unless the members in any general body meeting has made a regulation that the management committee should obtain its prior approval for any Investment of idle finds.
5.The above applies to Sinking Fund also.
6.For reimbursing Rs 1500,000 Bye Law No 136 and Section 73(1AB) holds members of the management committee jointly and severally , subject to approval of the Deputy Registrar.
7.None of the above can help the inquiry against THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE.
If you have beaten any body it is a criminal act and for that the Society has no power to do any thing in the nature of punishment. At the same time whether to cooperate in the inquiry under Section 89 is not left to be decided by the management committee as it is being done under IPC and it is not a voluntary provision.