Court : Supreme Court of India
..... corporation limited, a government company within the meaning of section 617 of the companies act, 1956. [28]. section 4 of coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 4(1) on the appointed day, the right, title and interest of the owners in relation to the coking coal mines specified in the first schedule shall stand transferred to, and shall vest absolutely in, the central government, free from all ..... the proprietary rights of the state in the mineral wealth not does it contain any provision divesting any owner of a mine of his proprietary rights. on the other hand, various enactments made by the parliament such as coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 and coal bearing areas (acquisition and development) act, 1957 make express declarations under section 4 and 7 respectively[26]. providing for acquisition .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1988MP181; 1988MPLJ266
..... process for the good of the community within the meaning of article 39(b). again in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd., air 1983 sc239 it has been held that coking coal mines (nationalisation) act is a legislation for giving effect to the policy of the state towards securing the principle specified ..... in article 39(b) of the constitution and is, therefore, immune under article 31c, from attack on the ground that it offends the fundamental right guaranteed by article 14. nationalisation of coal mines ..... unsecured loans of the government and banks.11. the petitioners pointed out that the provisions of coal mines (nationalisation) act, and sick textile undertakings (nationalisation) act are not akin to those of the hind cycles (nationalisation) act and differences in the relevant provisions were highlighted. no two acts can be identical and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1995(3)ALT228
..... amendment of the said provision by the constitution (forty-second amendment) act, 1976, got restored.14. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. (3 supra), writs were filed in calcutta high court questioning the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 pursuant to which the coal mines and coke oven plants belonging to the petitioner, were nationalized. the cases were withdrawn to the supreme court. the challenge to ..... of article 14. the central government claimed protection of article 31-c of the constitution of india. the question that arose for consideration of the supreme court, was whether the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 was entitled to the protection of article 31-c of the constitution. we may note here that the protection of article 31-c was claimed on the ground .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2000SC1203; 2000(3)BLJR2006; [2000]101CompCas257(SC); JT2000(3)SC55; 2000(2)SCALE259; (2000)3SCC312
..... in the schedule to the act, the property in question stood transferred to and vested in the central government free of all encumbrances, on the appointed day under the coal mines (nationalisation) act.5. it was observed that the result of the second point would depend on the decision of point no. 1.6. however, after remand, in ..... view of the submission made by the learned counsel for bccl that point no. 2 was covered by the judgment of this court in bharat coking coal ltd. v. madanlal agrawal : air1997sc1599 , the high court decided it first. on point no. 1 the high court restored the judgment of the trial court holding ..... as the vested properties'). thereafter under the order of the central government, the vested properties stood transferred to and vested in the government company named m/s. bharat coking coal ltd. (for short 'bccl'). as the appellants did not hand over the possession of the suit property to bccl, it initiated proceedings under the public premises ( .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Reported in : [2003(1)JCR230(Jhr)]
..... respondent no. 1, company as per extended definition of 'mines' as defined in the relevant coal mines nationalisation act, 1972 and as per the decision of the supreme court in bharat coking coal limited v. madan lal agrawal, reported in (1997) 1 scc 177. 5. from the pleading made by the ..... right and title.the question raised by the respondents as to whether the title to the property came to be vested with the respondents as a result of coal mines nationalisation act or not is itself a question of fact.it is a settled law that where a complicated questions of title arise for decision, the summary proceeding ..... records of right prepared in the year 1925 it is recorded to be owned by m/s. bengal coal company limited. the lands vested with respondent no. 1, company - m/s. bccl on the enactment of the coal mines nationalisation act 1972. the landed property in question has been vested absolutely and free from all encumbrance in favour of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1993(41)BLJR717; JT1992(Suppl1)SC17; 1992(3)SCALE111; (1993)1SCC145
..... right, title and interest of the owners of new govindpur colliery vested in the central government under the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). it was further alleged that the building in question is a mine as defined in section 3(i)(vi) of the act and as such it vested in the central ..... government's under section 4 of the act and subsequently in the respondent - bharat coking coal limited.4. the trial court held that the plots of land were ..... the suit of the plaintiff and also granted a decree for recovery of possession as the plaintiff had been dispossessed during the pendency of the suit. the bharat coking coal limited and others aggrieved against the judgment of the trial court went in appeal. learned additional district judge, dhanbad affirmed the findings of fact regarding the ownership and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... shri ashoke sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves ..... is presumed not to have intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made ..... of his submissions, he relied upon the judgments of the supreme court in mr. x vs. hospital z , (1998) 8 scc296 sanjeev coke manufacturing company vs. m/s. bharat coking coal limited and another, (supra); and n.k. bajpai vs. union of india and another, (2012) 4 scc653 47. consequently, according to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... shri ashoke sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves ..... is presumed not to have intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made ..... of his submissions, he relied upon the judgments of the supreme court in mr. x vs. hospital z , (1998) 8 scc296 sanjeev coke manufacturing company vs. m/s. bharat coking coal limited and another, (supra); and n.k. bajpai vs. union of india and another, (2012) 4 scc653 47. consequently, according to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... shri ashoke sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves ..... is presumed not to have intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made ..... of his submissions, he relied upon the judgments of the supreme court in mr. x vs. hospital z , (1998) 8 scc296 sanjeev coke manufacturing company vs. m/s. bharat coking coal limited and another, (supra); and n.k. bajpai vs. union of india and another, (2012) 4 scc653 47. consequently, according to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... shri ashoke sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves ..... is presumed not to have intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made ..... of his submissions, he relied upon the judgments of the supreme court in mr. x vs. hospital z , (1998) 8 scc296 sanjeev coke manufacturing company vs. m/s. bharat coking coal limited and another, (supra); and n.k. bajpai vs. union of india and another, (2012) 4 scc653 47. consequently, according to .....
Tag this Judgment!