Chhattisgarh Court September 2012 Judgments

iffco Tokio General Insurance Co Limited Raipur Cg Vs. Bharatlal and O ...

Court: Chhattisgarh

1. This is insurer's appeal against the award dated 8th September, 2011 passed by the 5th Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur in claim case No.04/2011. 2. As against the compensation of Rs.11,70,000/- claimed by the unfortunate parents of deceased - Pramendra Sahu by filing claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short `the Act') for his death in the motor accident on 08.05.2008, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.2,63,000/- as compensation along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of application till its actual payment. 3. The Tribunal, on a close scrutiny of the evidence led, held: the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of Auto bearing registration No.C.G.11/C/1990 being driven by respondent No.3, i.e. owner-cum-driver; Pramendra Sahu died on account of injuries sustained by him in the said accident; the appellant/Insurance Company liable for payment of compensation as it could not establish violation...

Ms. S.K.S. Ispat and Power Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Customs and Excise an ...

Court: Chhattisgarh

ORDER PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 16.09.2011 (Annexure P/6) passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Principal Bench) New Delhi (for short `the Tribunal') whereby the petitioner has been directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 1 crore within a period of 12 weeks from the date of the order and report compliance on 25.01.2012 and subject to the said deposit, the pre- deposit of the balance amount of duty and the entire amount of penalty shall stand waived and its recovery stayed during pendency of the appeal. The petitioner further seeks a direction to the Tribunal to reconsider the stay application/waiver of pre-deposit application. 2. The facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioner are that the petitioner company is a limited comply incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, engaged in manufacture of Iron and Steel products falling under ...

Nova Iron and Steel Limited Vs. None

Court: Chhattisgarh

ORDER IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND IN THE MATTER OF Section 78 and 100 To 104 of the Companies Act, 1956 1. This petition has been filed under Sections 78 and 100 to 104 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short `the Companies Act') by Nova Iron and Steel Limited, (Petitioner company) seeking approval of this Court to the proposed reduction of share capital as resolved by its resolution dated 17.03.2012 (Annexure K). 2. The registered office of the Petitioner Company is situated at village Dagori, Tahsil Belha, District Bilaspur, within the jurisdiction of this Court. 3. The Petitioner Company was incorporated on 01.05.1989 (Annexure A), its authorized, issued, subscribed and paid up capital, as on 31.12.2011, is as under: Authorised Share :160,00,00,000/-Capital 16,00,00,000 Equity Shares of Rs. 10/- each Total :160,00,00,000/-Issued and Subscribed 15,50,00,000 Equity Shares of Rs. 10/- each:155,00,00,000/-Total :155,00,00,000/-Paid-up Share Capital 15,05,81,200 Equity Sha...

Smt Kiran Choudhary Vs. State of Mp Now State of Cg and Others

Court: Chhattisgarh

(Writ Appeal under Section 2 (1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to the Division Bench) Act, 2006) Per SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J. 1. This intra-court appeal arises from the order dated 21.7.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP (S) No.2299 of 2005 whereunder the writ petition, preferred by the appellant herein, for issuance of direction of payment of arrears of salary for the period from 6.7.1984 to 9.11.1986 along with increment and other consequential benefits, was dismissed. 2. The case of the appellant, in brief, is that the appellant was initially appointed as Lower Division Teacher vide order dated 19.09.1981. The appellant was, thereafter, terminated from service vide order dated 06.07.1984. The aforesaid order was challenged by the appellant in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, registered as M.P.No.2936 of 1984. During pendency of that petition, respondents decided to re-appoint the appellant in view of relaxation of age limit vide circular dated 20.01.1986 and purs...

Pal Singh Chawla Vs. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and Other ...

Court: Chhattisgarh

ORDER PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 27.07.2009 (Annexure P/1) whereby the request of the petitioner for re-testing of the sample was rejected, the order dated 17.02.2010 (Annexure P/2) whereby the dealership agreement dated 10.05.2006 between the petitioner and the respondent-Corporation has been terminated and the allotment order dated 18.03.2010 (Annexure P/3) whereby the location for RO dealership has been changed from Bhanupratappur, District Kanker to Fingeshwar, District Raipur, and allotted to the respondent No. 3. 2. The facts, in brief, are that the petitioner is the proprietor of retail outlet (for short `RO') dealer namely M/s Chawla Petrol Pump, Fingeshwar, Raipur, engaged in sale of High Speed Diesel (for short `the HSD') i.e. Diesel and Motor Spirit (for short `the MS') i.e. Petrol. The petitioner established the petrol pump in February, 2006 pursuant to the dealership agreement executed between...

Gulab Chand and Others Vs. the Municipal Corporation Bhilai and Others

Court: Chhattisgarh

ORDER PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. By way of this petition, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondent No. 1 and 2, to allot the plots in question in favour of the petitioners and to deliver its possession, further, to conduct an enquiry into the conduct of the respondent authorities and their erring officials, and to saddle them with exemplary cost and the petitioners be compensated adequately. 2. The facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioners are that the petitioners are the petty shopkeepers running small kuccha shops and selling cheap garments on G.E. Road, on a place called as Sasta Bazar for the last 10 to 12 years. The respondent No. 1 and 2, i.e. Special Area Development Authority, Bhilai, which was later on substituted by Municipal Corporation, Bhilai, undertook a demolition drive in April 1992 wherein the entire Sasta Market was uprooted and demolished. Thereafter, a scheme was formulated by the respondent No. 1 and 2 for rehabilita...

Setho Prasad Gupta and Others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others

Court: Chhattisgarh

Reported in: 2012(4)LLN638

ORDER WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 and 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. By this petition, the petitioners seek quashing of the award dated 07.02.2012 (Annexure P/1) passed by the respondent No. 3, in complaint case No. 19 (Om Prakash Soni v. Setho Prasad Gupta) whereunder the Ombudsmen, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (for short `MNREGA), has directed to register a criminal case against the petitioners and to recover the amount of wages from petitioner No. 2. 2. The facts, in brief, are that the petitioner No. 1 is holding the substantive post of Assistant Grade III in the department of Panchayat and Rural Development. At present, he is discharging his duties in the office of Collector, Balrampur. The petitioner No. 2 was appointed on the post of Mate under the MNREGA, on the basis of resolution passed by Gram Panchayat, Bhanora, and the petitioner No. 3 is holding the substantive post of Panchayat Secretary, and posted at Gram Panchayat, Bhanora. The...

T.S. Singh Deo Vs. Ramanuj Dubey and Another

Court: Chhattisgarh

ORDER WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the plaintiff/landlord challenging the Executing Court's order dated 28.9.2004 whereby the Executing Court i.e., the Fifth Civil Judge, Class-II, Ambikapur has allowed judgment debtor's application u/s 3 read with Article 135 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (henceforth the "Act") and has dismissed the execution application on the ground that the Execution Application having been preferred after 3 years from the date of decree is barred by limitation as provided under Article 135 of the Act and as such it deserves to be dismissed. 2. The petitioner/plaintiff preferred a suit for permanent injunction against the respondents/defendants seeking issuance of a decree to restrain them from damaging/demolishing the tenanted premises or to repair the same by themselves or through any relative, servants or agents and also for restraining th...

Smt. Nilima Naveen Dole Vs. Union of India and Others

Court: Chhattisgarh

ORDER (Application for review of the order dated 22-2-2012  passed in  WP (S) No.1168 of 2008) Heard learned counsel for the parties. 1. The review petitioner (for short "the petitioner") seeks review of the order passed by this Court in Smt. Nilima Naveen Dole vs. Union of India and others1 mainly on the grounds that while dismissing the writ petition, this Court reached to the conclusion that the marks, which were obtained by the petitioner, were lesser than that of respondent No.4 and, therefore, the promotion of the petitioner was rightly cancelled. The Court ought to have considered the other aspects e.g. (1) the petitioner had worked for two years on the promoted post successfully; (2) the mistake which was cropped up, should have not been cropped up if due care would have been taken by the Officers of the Department to whom the responsibility of the examination was entrusted; and (3) the Department has not taken any action against those persons who are guilty of commit...

Neelam Kaushal Chandrakar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others

Court: Chhattisgarh

Reported in: 2012(4)LLN643

ORDER WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. Notice to the respondents is dispensed with as Shri Shrivastava, learned Panel Lawyer appears on behalf of State/respondents and consents for hearing. 2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks setting aside the notice dated 21.09.2011 (Annexure P/1) with all consequential orders/proceedings/ actions taken in pursuance of the said notice and to set aside the order dated 25.07.2012 (Annexure P/2) to the extent of keeping the case No. 60-A/89-2010-2011 pending and direct to send proposal before the respondent Collector for constituting Enquiry Committee and submit report within a stipulated period for deciding the matter under section 40 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short `the Act, 1993) at the earliest. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the observations made by this Court on 08.11.2011, in W.P.(C) No. 6190/2011 (Neelam Kaushal  Chandrakar v. State of...