.....jharkhand at ranchi w.p. (c) no. 3183 of 2012 m/s supre smelters ltd., a company incorporated under the provisions of companies act, 1956 having its factory at telaiyabasti, jhumritelaiya, koderma through one of its director sri deepak kumar, son of sri s.r. agarwal resident of geetayan, 18h, alipore road, p.o. & p.s. - alipore, town kolkata, dist. west bengal. … petitioner with w.p. (c) no. 2706 of 2012 m/s aloke steel industries private limited, a company incorporated under the provisions of companies act, 1956 having its unit at hesla, ramgarh cantonment through one of its director ram chandra rungta, son of late ram kumar rungta resident of main road, ramgarh cantonment, p.o. & p.s. - ramgarh, dist. ramgarh. … petitioner with w.p. (c) no. 2722 of 2012 m/s jharkhand ispat private limited, a company incorporated under the provisions of companies act, 1956 having its unit at hesla, ramgarh cantonment through one of its director sri rajeev kumar agarwal, son of sri durga pd. agarwal, resident of near punjab national bank, main road, p.o. & p.s. - ramgarh, dist. ramgarh. … petitioner with w.p. (c) no. 2735 of 2012 m/s bihar foundry & casting ltd., a company incorporated.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....herein above as well, however, on that ground the selection made in september, 2010 on the basis of survey report existing at the relevant point of time would not vitiate the appointment of respondent no.6. it also seems that an unseemingly controversy has been fueled by a person to whom both petitioner and the private respondent no.6 are related. be that as it may, on being tested on the principles of judicial review on the basis of relevant material facts, appointment of respondent no.6 does not appear to suffer from any infirmity so as to warrant interference by this court. it is trite to observe that if the decision make process is not found to be vitiated, this court is not required to exercise its discretion under extraordinary jurisdiction to interfere in the matter. the writ petition being devoid of merit is dismissed. (aparesh kumar singh, j.) a. mohanty
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....jharkhand at ranchi w.p. (c) no. 3183 of 2012 m/s supre smelters ltd., a company incorporated under the provisions of companies act, 1956 having its factory at telaiyabasti, jhumritelaiya, koderma through one of its director sri deepak kumar, son of sri s.r. agarwal resident of geetayan, 18h, alipore road, p.o. & p.s. - alipore, town kolkata, dist. west bengal. … petitioner with w.p. (c) no. 2706 of 2012 m/s aloke steel industries private limited, a company incorporated under the provisions of companies act, 1956 having its unit at hesla, ramgarh cantonment through one of its director ram chandra rungta, son of late ram kumar rungta resident of main road, ramgarh cantonment, p.o. & p.s. - ramgarh, dist. ramgarh. … petitioner with w.p. (c) no. 2722 of 2012 m/s jharkhand ispat private limited, a company incorporated under the provisions of companies act, 1956 having its unit at hesla, ramgarh cantonment through one of its director sri rajeev kumar agarwal, son of sri durga pd. agarwal, resident of near punjab national bank, main road, p.o. & p.s. - ramgarh, dist. ramgarh. … petitioner with w.p. (c) no. 2735 of 2012 m/s bihar foundry & casting ltd., a company incorporated.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....otherwise ordered, by petition ex parte. such an application in terms of rule 27 of chapter 16 has not been made to court. therefore, in terms of rule 27 rule 16 in the event no application for drawing up and completion of the decree or order is made to the registrar, original side within the time stipulated therein or within the time permitted by the court, the department is not required to draw up a decree or an order. in such circumstances, the contention of the defendants that the department was at fault in not drawing up the decree cannot be accepted. none of the parties to the suit had applied for drawing up and completion of the decree. in such circumstances, applying the ratio of steel & allied products ltd.(supra) it could be said that the preliminary decree dated july 24, 2014 did not attain finality in absence of the same being drawn up, sealed and filed. consequently, the court retains the jurisdiction to reconsider, recall or modify such a decree. since the preliminary decree dated july 24, 2014 had not been perfected the ratio laid down in venkata reddy & ors.(supra) and mool chand & ors.(supra) are not attracted. two immovable properties involved in the present.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....from the post mortem examination report whereby the doctor,who had held autopsy did notice the injuries on the person of the deceased. it be stated that the doctor has not been examined but when the post mortem report had been taken into evidence without objection being raised the defence now cannot take any advantage of the fact of non- examination of the doctor. similarly, non-examination of the investigating officer hardly affects the case of the prosecution as nothing has been shown by the defence that the case of the defence has been prejudiced on account of non-examination of the investigating officer. moreover, the place of occurrence gets fully proved from the testimonies of those witnesses. thus, we do find that the trial court was absolutely justified in recording the conviction and sentence against the appellant and thereby it is hereby affirmed. in the result, this appeal stands dismissed. ( r.r.prasad, j.) (pramath patnaik, j.) jharkhand high court, ranchi, the 13th may, 2015, nafr/n.dev.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....2013 issued by the chief manager (personnel/ee) of eastern coalfields ltd.along with all consequential benefits and back wages with interest. the facts of the case briefly stated are as follows:- (2) the petitioner is working as manager (finance) kajora area, eastern coalfields ltd.(3) while the petitioner was posted as senior accounts officer in s.p mines area, chirta, deoghar, jharkhand, a charge-sheet was issued to him under cover of a memorandum dated 12th september, 2007 issued by the chairman-cum-managing director of the eastern coalfields ltd.by the said memorandum the petitioner was informed that a domestic enquiry would be held against him for having committed alleged acts of irregularity in the discharge of his duty. the petitioner was asked to submit his written statement of defence. the enquiring authority by his report dated 21st april, 2008 exonerated the petitioner of the charges brought against him. (4) the chairman-cum-managing director of eastern coalfields ltd.acting as disciplinary authority, however, disagreed with the finding of the enquiring authority. the disciplinary authority by his order dated 24th june, 2010 held that the charge against the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....the order of the assessing officer as confirmed by the cit(a).the appeal before us was admitted on the following questions:“i) whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case in spite of the relevant facts and evidences being on record the hon’ble tribunal erred in law in coming to a finding that the machinery was not used for the purpose of business and, therefore, the claim of depreciation under section 32 of the act for a sum of rs.32,77,267.00 could not be allowed, even though the cession of work/suspension of work in the factory premises of the petitioner was not on account of the petitioner, and during that time also the machinery was kept ready for use and that the factory having resumed operation, immediately after a certain period of time and which is still running up to the present date and the further fact is that the word user being given a wider meaning to include not only active user but passive user, the confirmation of the orders of the assessing officer as well as the commissioner of income tax (appeals) by the tribunal being the last fact finding authority by ignoring relevant facts and on the contrary taking irrelevant facts into.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....of the petitioner-company. firstly he submitted that mr.manoj baid was duly given notice to appear in the proceeding but he failed to turn up; in fact, he disappeared from the scenario altogether. mr.baid’s licence had been revoked earlier by the customs authorities. secondly, mr.saraf referred to this court’s order dated 4th august, 2014 and submitted that although in the said order there was no direction to allow the petitioner-company to conduct cross-examination of the witnesses whose statements were recorded but, in fact, such cross-examination was allowed. in support of this he also referred to various correspondence exchanged between the parties. he submitted that the proceedings were conducted by rigorously following the principles of natural justice. thirdly, mr.saraf submitted that the period of 90 days mentioned in regulation 20 of the cblr, 2013 is only directory and issuance of notice beyond the period of 90 days from the date of receipt of offence report does not render the proceedings bad. (11) the main point urged by mr.saraf was one of availability of an efficacious alternative remedy. he referred regulation 21 of the cblr2013which is set out.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....appellant, he went there and found the appellant assaulting his wife as a result of which she died, but, he in his evidence has not supported that fact. he, however, in his evidence has testified that when he came to the house of the appellant he found the deceased dead in the courtyard, he never saw the appellant assaulting the deceased. other witnesses either have not supported the case of the prosecution or are the hearsay witnesses, who derived their knowledge either from p.w. 9, pollus kullu or from villagers.10. thus, it is evident that no one is the eye witness to that incidence. but the fact remain that the deceased was found killed in the house where the appellant and his wife were leaving. in such event, the burden was upon the appellant to explain as to how the deceased died as it must be within his knowledge. but the appellant does not seems to have discharged his burden as he has simply denied the incriminating evidence appearing against him. he never came forward to explain as to how the deceased died, though number of injuries were there over the persons of the deceased which according to the doctor have been inflicted with the sharp cutting weapon. in absence of.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....excise duty in terms of notification 1/93-ce dated 28.2.1993 (as amended vide notification no.59/94-ce dated 1.3.1994) for the aforesaid goods manufactured in its factory. this has, however, been denied to the assessee by the department on the ground that the brand name “kalimark” has been used on the goods which belong to m/s. shri k.p.r.shakthivel and since the assessee is using the aforesaid brand name of the third party, by virtue of para 4 of the aforesaid notification the exemption would not be allowed to the respondent. this stand taken by the respondent department has been accepted by the cestat in its impugned judgment. the tribunal has noted the fact that business of manufacture and sale of aerated water was started in the name of `kalimark aerated water works' by the huf of which m/s. shri p.v.s. k.palaniappa nadar was the karta. later on it was converted into a joint family business of sh. palaniappa nadar and his three sons and a daughter. at some point of time the parties/partners fell apart and entered into a family settlement which is contained in deed of mutual agreement dated 12.3.1993. the tribunal has recorded that in terms of this mutual agreement.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT