Skip to content

Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Limited and anr.

Decided On : Dec-23-1982

Court : Kolkata

Notice (8): Undefined index: topics [APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 36]
Warning (2): Invalid argument supplied for foreach() [APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 39]

LAW: Article 226 of the Constitution, the Aluminium Control Order, Section 3, Section 2, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3, Article 14 of the Constitution, Article 226(2, Constitution, Article 226, Article 226 of the Constitution where, Article 226 of the Constitution, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3 of the Act, Section 3, Section 3 of the Act, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3, Section 8(1)(e, Section 8, Section 8(1)(e, Section 8, Section 8(1, theEssential Commodities Act, the Essential Commodities Act, Section 3, Section 3, the Essential Commodities Act, the Essential Commodities Act, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3 of the Act, Section 3 of the Act, Section 3, the Aluminium Regulation, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3 of the Act, Section 3 of the Act, Section 3, Section 3, Section 3 of the Act, Article 266 of the Constitution and a few, the Explanation to Clause 3, Section 3, Section 3, Article 14 of the Constitution so, Section 3 of the Act, Section 3, Section 3 of the Act Government, Section 3 of the Act, Section 3, Section 3(3

PERSON: M.M. Dutt, l80/-, thr., Press Note, Renusagar, Renusagar, Renusagar, Renusagar, Renusagar, Renusagar, Renusagar, the Rule Nisi, Noni Coomer Chakraborti, Sidhartha Shankar Ray, Chakrataorti, Further, Darshanlal, S. O. 357, S. O. 600, Controller, Gazette, pool:--, Controller, Government, Renusagar, Ray, Hirak Ghosh, Hirak Ghosh, Ray, Ishak v. Thowfeek, Ray, Ishak v. Thowfeek, Ranganatha Reddy, Beg J., Ray, G. K. Mitter J., Cls, case.36, Agrl, Ray, Ray, Ray, Ray, Panipal, Further, Ray, Ray C. J., Meenakshee Mill's, Laxmi Khandsari v. State of U. P., Fazal Ali J., loss.44, Latham C. J., Mukherjea J., Madras, Lakshmindra Tirtha Swamiar, Ray, Venkata Subbarao v State of, Latham, Matthews, Ray, Ray, P. P. Enterprises v. Union, Hingir-Rampur Coal Company v State, Madras, Rajasthan v. Sajjan Lal, alumina

ORG: the Union of India, the Government of India, Ministry of Steel, Coal (Department of Mines, the Controller of Aluminium, Court, the Rule Nisi, Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Limited, the Central Government, Clauses 4A, Renukoot, the State of Uttar Pradesh, BharatAluminium Company Limited, isa Central Government, theMadras Aluminium Company Ltd., andIndian Aluminium Company Ltd., The Central Government, the Central Government, the Minerals & Metals Trading Corporation, the Central Government, the Control Order, Different State Electricity Boards, the Control Order, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the Controller of Aluminium, the Aluminium Regulation Account, CompanyEstimated production(tonnes)Retention price(Rs.)Amount due, 68Dwill, the Central Government, the Central Government, Clause 4A of the Control Order, Clause 4A, Clause 4, Clause 4A, the Central Government, inter alia, Government, the Press Note.12, Government, Renusagar Power Co. Ltd., MW, Government, the Central Government, the Bureau of Industrial Costs and Prices, BICP, the Central Government, BICP, the Government of India, Ministry of Steel, Coal (Department of Mines, BICP, BICP, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Central Government under Clause 11, Court, the Rule Nisi, Clauses 4A, Clauses 4, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the Central Government, MMTC, The Central Government, MMTC, the Central Government, Court, Court, the Central Government under Clause 11, the Central Government, MMTC, Court, Court, Tribunal or Authority, Government, Clauses 4A, the Control Order, Government, the Central Government, Clauses 4, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Union of India, Court, the Central Government, Renukut, the State of Uttar Pradesh, Court, Court, Court, Renukoot, Court, Calcutta, inter alia, Calcutta, Consigning Agents, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Calcutta, Calcutta, Court, the High Court, the High Court, Court, Collector of Customs & Central Excise, the First Schedule, the Central Excises, the Central Government, the State of Assam, the State of Assam, the Reserve Bank of India, Court, the Collector of Customs, the Collector of Customs, the Supreme Court, the Advocate-General, State of Bihar v. Madhya Pradesh Khair Industries, Calcutta, Court, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Rule Nisi, the Rule Nisi, the Central Government, the High Court, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Central Government, Court, Court, the Central Government, the Central Government, Clauses 4A, Clauses 4A, The Control Order, the State Electricity Boards, Government Department, the Central Government, Government, the Central Government, the Central Government, Clauses 3, Clause 4, The Central Government or theController, the Central Government, the Central Government, Controller, Government, un, The Central Government, Controller, The Central Government, the Central Government, the Central Government, Controller, the Central Government, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the Central Government, Clause 4A, Controller, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Controller, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Clause 4A, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Aluminium Regulation Account, The Control Order, the Central Government, the Central Government, Corporation, the Clause 4A of the Control Order, Government, Government, Clause 4A, Government, Government, Government, The Central Government, the Government of India, Ministry of Steel, Coal (Department of Mines, Controller of Aluminium, Government, inter alia, Government, Government, inter alia, the Central Government, Additional Soliciter General, Court, Court, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Central Government, Government, the Privy Council, Board, Board, Clause 4A of the Control Order, Government, the Privy Council, Government, the Privy Council, Government, SupremeCourt, Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v., Union of India, the Sugar Control Order, Government, the Privy Council, Parlakimedy, the Supreme Court, the Privy Council, the Sugar Control Order, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Privy Council, the Supreme Court, the Privy Council, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Sugar Control Order, Clause 4A of the Control Order, the Supreme Court, State, the Supreme Court, Saraswati, the Privy Council, Supreme Court, Government, Whatit, Union of India, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Counsel for, Union of India, Anakapalle Co-Op, Union of India, the Supreme Courthad, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Central Government, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Prag Ice & Oil Mills v. Union of India, AIR 1979 SC 1296, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Panipat Co-Ope-rative, Union of India, Anakapalle Cooperative Agricultural, Industrial Society Ltd. v. Union, Union ofIndia AIR 1974, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Clauae 4A, the Control Order, the Central Government, Prag Ice & Oil Mills', the Supreme Court, Prag Ice & Oil Mills', AIR 1976 SC, the Supereme Court, Sec, AIR 1973, SC, the Supreme COURT, the Tariff Commission, the Sugar Enquiry Commission, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Prag Ice & Oil Mills', the Supreme Court, Prag Ice & Oil Mill's, Clause 4A, Government, inputs.40, Government, Government, MMTC, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Rupees, Government, CottenTextile, Government, Government, Government, Court, the Supreme Court, Prag Ice & Oil Mill's, the Supreme Court, Prag Ice & Oil Mill's, Counsel for HINDALCO, the Supreme Court, Prag Ice & Oil Mill's, the Supreme Court, New India Sugar Works, State of U. P., Government, the Supreme Court, New India Sugar Works, Government, the Controller of Aluminium, Rupees 3,225/-, Court, day.46, Clauses 4A, the Control Order, Clauses 4A, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the High Court of, Chicory Marketing Boards, B. K, the Supreme Court, the High Court, Clauses 4A, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the Privy Council, Lower Main Land Dairy Products Sales Adjustment Committee, Crystal Diary,, the Provincial Legislature, the Daily Products Sales Adjustment Act, Committee, Committee, Committee, Committee, Committee, Board, Lordships, Committee, the Supreme Court, the Privy Council, Counsel of HINDALCO, Clauses 4A, ControlOrder, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Privy Council, Privy Council, Chicory Marketing Board, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Privy Council, AC, Wills United Dairies Ltd., LT 822, Clauses 4A, the Control Order, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Clauses 4A, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the Control Order, the Central Government, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Union of India, the Supreme Court, Government, Government, Government, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Government, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Government, theAluminium Regulation Account, Account, the Aluminium Regulation Account, theDelhi High Court, Union of India, ILR, Additional Solicitor-General, the Consolidated Fund, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the Consolidated Fund, Additional Solicitor-General, the Supreme Court, Zenith Lamps & Etectricals Ltd., State, Southern Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals, the Consolidated Fund, Clause 4, Clause 4A, Clause 4B, Clause 4B, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the Control Order, Government, un, Clause 4, the Control Order, Government, Clause 4A, Government, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Government, the Aluminium Regulation Account, the Control Order, Government, the Control Order, the Control Order, Government, the Control Order, Government, Corporation, Government, Government, Government, Government, Government, Court, Government, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Government, the Aluminium Regulation Account, Essentia

NORP: Joint, English, Mathews, Hindu

CARDINAL: five, 4B, 1957.5, One, four, four, four, 4.3, 2, 182.1, 182.The, 182, 182-160)=Rs, 182-150)=Rs, 250, 220, 38.10, five, 1, 1, 2, approximately 135, about 2.25, 1.45, 17, 1, 4B, 2, 4A, 3, 4, 5, 6, two, 4B, 4A, two, 1, 3, 1, five, 1980CriLJ684, two, 11, two, 4B, 4B, 1, 4, 1, 2, 4, 1, only one, 2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 29, 2, 2, 22, one, 11, 11, 11, 11, 46, 34, 46, 1, 2, 164, 1975]1SCR956, 2, 2, 2, 1978]1SCR641, 1968]1SCR463, 2, 3, 2, 3, 1, two, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 1973]2SCR860, 1973]2SCR882, 3, 3C, 2, 3-A, 3, two, One, 1973]2SCR860, 1973]2SCR882, two, 3-A, 3B, 3C, 1973]2SCR882, 507, 8C, three-fold, 21, 20,76,145/-, 1974]2SCR398, one, 1978CriLJ1281a, 1981]3SCR92, 2,200/-, 41, 1.45, 23, 2,200/-, 1.5, 1.45, 18, 1,170/-, 2,200/-, 3,370/-, 23, 1.5, 1.45, 18, 23, 2,200/-, 2,200/-, 2,200/-, 1.5, 1.5, 1.45, 4B, one, 4B, 263, 4B, two, 1965]2SCR577, 4B, 992, 227, 2, 127, 4B, one, 4B, 3, one, 1982]3SCR510, 2, 1961]2SCR537, 1973]2SCR973, 1974]2SCR741, 1982]1SCR519, 1, 3, 4, one, 1, 1, Two, two, 1, 2, one, one, two, 2, 2, 2

DATE: Oct. 4. 1979, 1970, 1955, 1955, June 29, Sept 1977, May 20, 1970, 1970, March 20, 1979, Oct. 4, 1979, Oct. 5, 1979, October 1978, Oct. 1975, July 16, 1979, Jan. 15, 1970, September, 1977, October 1978, 1315/-, Oct. 1978, Oct. 5, 1979, the day, Oct. 24, 1979, 1978, 1974, 1944, 30 days, Oct. 3, 1979, the next day, October 4, 1979, Oct. 24, 1979, November 29, 1979, Oct. 18, 1978, July 15, 1975, Oct. 16, 1975, monthly, 4, 4A, the year 1978, October, 1978, May 1, 1978, July 1978, October 1978, 46, 34, 46, Para 34, 46, 46, 46, 1968, 1718, Page 1214, 1943, 1952, 1977, 1316, '37, 1296, 1956, 1965, the year 1980, that year, 1980, 1980, 1948, Para 4, '43, Sept. 28, 1979, 3,275/-, October 4, 1979, daily, 1933 A. C. 168, 1929, monthly, 1933 A. C. 168, 1914, 1922, 1974

GPE: Mirzapur, India, Counsel, New Delhi, the District of Mirzapur, Calcutta, West Bengal, Court.25, Darshanlal, Shillong, Assam, Calcuttaas, India, India, India, Parlakimedi, Saraswati, Karnataka, Saraswati, Kamalabai, Kamala, Panipat, Anakapalle, Sugar Mills v., India, Meenakshee Mills v., Panipat, Ankapalle, Panipat, para, Australia, Commr, Australia, British Columbia, Thankerton, Thankerton, the City of, Aluminium, Diwan, overfilled.56, Orissa, Govt, Kerala

QUANTITY: one metric tonne, 170/-per tonne, 110 tonnes, 110 tonnes, 25,000 tonnes, 2,200/-per tonne

ORDINAL: first, third, first, second, first, first, first, first, third, first, third, First, Second, second

EVENT: Clause 11

PRODUCT: Calcutta, Calcutta, Calcutta, Calcutta, Calcutta, Calcutta, Calcutta, Calcutta, Calcutta, Cal LJ 27, Calcutta, Calcutta, Calcutta, Calcutta, Calcutta, Calcutta, Para 46, Para 34, Pearson, the Mustard Oil, Section 3(2)(c, Rupees 20,00,000/-, Rupees 1,170/-, same.47

FAC: Birla Building, the Official Gazette

PERCENT: 50%, 50%, 100%

View Full Judgment


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //