National thermal Power Corporation Vs. Hind Calvanising Engg. Co. Ltd. and anr. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
the case questioned whether the deletion of party from winding up petition on transfer of liability was proper under sections 433 and 4(3) of the companies act, 1956 - the national thermal power corporation (ntpc) awarded contract for laying of cable lines to 'hind galvanic and engineering co ltd' (hgec) - the dues under the contract were not paid - hgec filed up a winding up petition - meanwhile ntpc was taken over by government under power grid corporation of india (pgci), pending the winding up petition - however the name of ntpc was not deleted from same - it was observed that non deletion did not prejudiced the interest of ntpc - it was ruled that no deletion of name was justified - labour & services disability pension: [vikramajit sen, sanjiv khanna & s.l.bhayana,jj] army act (46 of 1950), section 192 & pension regulations for the army (1961), regulation. 173 claimant was on casual leave sustained injury which contributed to invalidation for military service claim for disability pension held, to claim disability pension by military personnel it requires to be established that the injury or fatality suffered by the concerned claimant bears a causal connection with military service. secondly, if this obligation exists so far as discharge from the armed force on the opinion of a medical board the obligation and responsibility a fortiori exists so far as injuries and fatalities suffered during casual leave are concerned. thirdly, as a natural corollary it is irrelevant whether the concerned personnel was on causal or annual leave at the time or at the place when and where the incident transpired. this is so because it is the causal connection which alone is relevant. fourthly, since travel to and fro the place of posting may not appear to everyone as an incident of military service, a specific provision has been incorporated in the pension regulations to bring such travel within the entitlement for disability pension if an injury is sustained in this duration. fifthly, it cannot be said that each and every injury sustained while availing of casual leave would entitle the victim to claim disability pension. sixthly, provisions treating casual leave as on duty would be relevant for deciding questions pertaining to pay or to the right of the authorities to curtail or cancel the leave. lastly, injury or death resulting from an activity not connected with military service would not justify and sustain a claim for disability pension. this is so regardless f whether the injury or death has occurred at the place of posting or during working hours. this is because attributability to military service is a factor which is required to be established. - at the same time, the learned single judge declined to delete ntpc from the array of parties as he was of the view that the court will be better assisted if the appellant herein remained on record as a party respondent.anil dev singh, j.1. this appeal is directed against the order of the learned single judge dated january 9, 1995. the facts giving rise to the appeal are as follows:2. in the year 1985 the appellant, national thermal power corporation ltd. (for short 'ntpc ltd'), awarded the contract for laying of transmission line for korba bhilai-ii to respondent no.1, hind galvanizing and engineering company ltd. (for short 'the hgec ltd'). on may 15, 1992, the hgec ltd. filed a petition for winding up of the appellant company for non-payment of a sum of rs. 42,94,325/- which according to the former became due and payable to it by the latter under the contract.3. while proceedings before the learned company judge were pending, the national thermal power corporation ltd., the national hydroelectric power corporation limited and the north-eastern electric power corporation limited (acquisition and transfer of power transmission systems) ordinance, 1993, was promulgated. subsequently the ordinance was replaced by the national thermal power corporation limited, the national hydroelectric power corporation limited and the north-eastern electric power corporation limited (acquisition and transfer of power transmission systems) act, 1993 (for short 'the act'). under the ordinance and the act, the power transmission systems were vested in t he central government and after they were so vested, the power transmission systems by a legal fiction were deemed to have been transferred and vested in the power grid corporation of india (for short 'the pgci')4. after the act came into force, the learned single judge by order dated 9th january, 1995 directed the power grid corporation of india to be arrayed as a party respondent. it appears that this was done keeping in view the provisions of section 4(3) of the act, which provides that all suits, appeals and other proceedings of whatever nature pending against any of the three companies viz, the national thermal power corporation limited, the national hydroelectric power corporation limited and the north-eastern electric power corporation limited etc. shall not abate but shall continue against the pgci. at the same time, the learned single judge declined to delete ntpc from the array of parties as he was of the view that the court will be better assisted if the appellant herein remained on record as a party respondent. the appellant feeling aggrieved by the order of learned company judge to the extent that it was not deleted from the array of parties, has filed the instant appeal.5. we do not see any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned single judge. by the impugned order the learned company judge has not held the appellant to be responsible for the payment of the aforesaid amount to the pgci nor any financial liability has been foisted on it. the question whether the appellant is liable to make payment to the respondent is yet to be determined by the learned company judge. the interests of the appellant are not prejudiced by the impugned order in any manner whatsoever. in case the pgci's plea that it was not liable to discharge the liability incurred by the ntpc is accepted by the company judge, then in that event neither the pgci nor the ntpc will be available to answer the pleas in the company petition, if the present plea of the appellant for being deleted from the array of parties is upheld.6. in view of the aforesaid discussion, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. we order accordingly.