Advanced Search Results

Union Of India Vs. M/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

ANALYSIS .............................................................................................. 22 i. Relevant Statutory Scheme and Provisions .............................................. 22 ii. Scope of Section 106 of the Railways Act, 1989 ........................................ 29 a. What is meant by an “Overcharge”?. ....................................................... 35 b. Concept of an ‘Overcharge’ and an … E. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT .................... 16 Civil Appeal No(s). 1891-1966 of 2024 Page 1 of 95 F. ANALYSIS .............................................................................................. 22 i. Relevant Statutory Scheme and Provisions .............................................. 22 ii. Scope of Section 106 of

Pushpaben Jitendrakumar Shah and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors ...

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Civil

Acts : Indian Railways Act, 1890 - Sections 47, 63, 93, 101, 109 and 109(1); Railways Act, 1989 - Sections 47, 47(1), 66(1), 67, 67(1), 67(2), Rules 95, 96, 102, 114, 115, 115(b), 120, 121, 128, 129, 130, 131, 137, 138, 150 and 163

Reported in : II(2005)ACC185; 2005ACJ191; AIR2004Guj370; (2004)3GLR2206

was applicable in the instant case, since the accident occurred prior to the coming into force of the Railways Act, 1989), the railway administration was bound to fix and display the maximum number of passengers that may be carried … or movement of the train for traffic purposes, as provided by Rule 95. As per Rule 96 of the said Rules, when a train is … chaos and passengers were 'fighting their best to get into the train'. The passengers were sitting on joining sections between the two compartments and some were sitting even on outer part of the windows of the compartments

Mrinal Kanti Bose Vs. General Manager (Claims), N.F. Railways

Court : Guwahati

Subject : Civil

Acts : Railways Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 - Sections 13, 18 and 23; Railways Act, 1989 - Sections 2(32) and 107

Section 78 B of the Indian Railways Act, which stands repealed and replaced by Section 106 of the Railways Act, 1989. The claim application thus, contends Mr. Singh, had no valid foundation and was liable to be dismissed. Continuing

Kedarnath Jagdish Rai and Hemraj Lalji and Co. Vs. the Union of India ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Civil

Acts : Indian Railways Act, 1890 - Sections 78B; Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 - Sections 16 and 13(1)

Reported in : III(2004)ACC509; (2003)3MLJ446

of wheat of the value of Rs.1,78,000/-. The appellant caused a notice under Section 78B of the Indian Railways Act, 1890 on 05.05.1993 and thereafter moved the application under Section 16 of The Railway Claims Tribunal Act. The … not liable even as bailee under Section 99(1) of the Railways Act, 1989?(iii)Whether the Railways used reasonable foresight and care in the carriage of the … counsel for the appellants. 24. One another contention advanced by the counsel for the appellants is that under Section 95(g) of the Railways Act, the burden is on the Railways to prove that it has taken reasonable foresight

K.R.Sooraj vs Southern RAILWAY6

Court : Kerala

from uses of the premises by passengers and visitors to the railway station?(3) Has Section 11 of the Railways Act, 1989 application in the instant case and, even if the said section applies whether the lower appellate court is … and others v. KasimKhaleeli [AIR 1964 Madras 209], Ramesh Chandra v. Lambodar panda and others [AIR 1960 Orissa 95], Rau Rama Atkile v. Tukaram Nana Atkile and another [AIR 1939 Bombay 149] and Bhanum Ram and Others

Union of India versus M/S Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : [2024] 3 S.C.R. 1051

The following questions arise for consideration: (i) What is the scope of Section 106 sub-section (3) of the Railways Act, 1989; In other words, what constitutes an “overcharge” within the meaning of Section 106 sub-section (3) of the Railways … is for ultimately determining whether it is liable for refund or not, without jumping to any conclusion. [Paras 95 and 96] Case Law Cited Mafatlal Industries Ltd. & Ors. v. Union of India [1996] Suppl. 10 SCR

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Orissa State Electricity Board and ors.

Court : Orissa

Subject : Civil

Acts : Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 - Sections 17; Limitation Act, 1963 - Sections 5 and 14

Reported in : 2002ACJ430; 90(2000)CLT639

shall also exercise on and from the date of commencement of the provisions of Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989 (24 of 1989), all such jurisdiction, powers and authority as were exercisable immediately before that date by any … Development Corporation Ltd. and the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court reported in AIR 1980 Madh Pra 95 (Radheshyam Agarwal v. Union of India).7. Chapter-III of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, deals with jurisdiction, powers

M/s. Goodearth Agro Chem Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. The Container Corpo ...

Court : Mumbai Nagpur

Subject : Education

liable to pay penalty and other associated charges. He found that provisions of Sections 66 and 83 of Railways Act, 1989 enable Container Corporation to claim the same from M/s. Goodearth. He accordingly found penal charges payable at Rs.9,07,327.80. … the petitioners jointly and severally liable to pay penalty and other associated charges. He found that provisions of Sections 66 and 83 of Railways Act, 1989 enable Container Corporation to claim the same from M/s. Goodearth. He … coke as restricted commodity for movement by railway container. Railway Circular No. 95 of 2006 specifies penalty in cases of false declaration of goods. Penalty

Sudhira Mondal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Civil

Acts : Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 - Section 18; ; Railways Act, 1989 - Section 129; ; Railway Accidents and Untoward Incidents (Compensation) Rules, 1990; ; Railway Accidents and Untoward Incidents (Compensation) (Amendment) Rules, 1997

Reported in : 2005ACJ1457,AIR2004Cal270

facts and law are involved. In both the cases compensation has been claimed under Sec. 124 of the Railways Act 1989 for alleged death of the Rly. passengers in a Rly. accident.Admittedly on 25-11-1995, C-252 Dn Bardhaman-Howrah (Chord) Local … Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The appellant, who was

Ajay Maken & Ors. Vs.union of India & Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

To summarise the Railways' contentions: (i) Lands ―belonging to the Railways‖ fall exclusively within the purview of the Railways Act, 1989. Reference is made to the definition of ‗Railway‘ contained in Section 2(31) of the Railways Act, 1989. It … learned counsel for the DUSIB ―that the draft list of jhuggi dwellers was inspected by as many as 950 dwellers and 84 have submitted objections to it.‖ The Court directed the agencies to respond to the draft