Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: companies amendment act 2002 Court: himachal pradesh Page 1 of about 892 results (0.084 seconds)

Shobit Construction and anr. Etc. Vs. T.K. International Ltd.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : AIR2006HP4,2006(1)ARBLR510(HP)

..... the plaintiff for striking off the defiance off the defendant company, are concerned, the question which arises for consideration is whether the defendant has lost his right to file written statement as provided under order 8, rule 1, as substituted by the code, of civil procedure (amendment act, 2002).18.order 8, rule 1 may be reproduced for convenience ..... maintained right from the time the letters patent was issued, and has not been disturbed by the code of civil procedure, 1908, despite the amendments made in the cpc from 1976 to 2002.36. an argument was raised in iridum india telecom lid. (2005 air scw 138) that merely because section 129 of the code of ..... neither filed the original arbitration agreement nor any duly certified copy thereof' in terms of sub-section (2) of section 8 of the act. on this ground alone, lite application of the defendant-company is liable to be dismissed.13. mr. b. c. negi, learned counsel for the defendant, however, refers to the contract agreement between .....

Smt. Rajo Devi Vs. Kailash Giri Bus Service Society and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : 2008(3)ShimLC318

..... pendency of the present appeal, the state of himachal pradesh amended the rules and specifically made the provisions of order 41 rule 33, cpc applicable to the proceedings under the act. this was especially done so after the decision of a full bench of this court in lata v. united india insurance company (supra). admittedly, the decision rendered by this court in shri ..... and various high courts in ram deo and anr. v. geeta devi and ors. , abhilasha bai v. arvind kumar and ors. : 2002(2)mplj493 , lata v. united india insurance company ltd. and ors. and charan singh v. joginder singh and anr. 2002 (1) shim. l.c. 409 and samundra devi and ors. v. narendra kaur and ors. 2008 (2) s.l.j. (s .....

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Hiralal and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : IV(2006)ACC131

..... goods vehicle.14. in national insurance co. v. baljit kaur and ors. : air2004sc1340 , the apex court considered the impact of the amendment to the motor vehicles act made in 1994. the apex court held that after the amendment of 1994, the insurance company was bound to cover liability with respect to owner of the goods or his authorised representatives. however, it further held that ..... three-judge bench of the apex court in new india assurance co. ltd. v. asha rani and ors. iii (2002) a.c.c. 753 (s.c.) : (2003) 1 s.c.c 223, considered the question whether it is compulsory for the insurance company to cover the liability in respect of passengers travelling in a goods vehicle. this decision was in context of .....

Ram Kishan and ors. Vs. Kanwar Papers Private Ltd.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

..... . counsel were heard on various dates before orders were reserved in the case on october 5, 1988.6. section 155 of the companies act (for short 'the act') was omitted by the companies (amendment) act, 1988. prior to its omission, this provision read as under:'155. power of court to rectify register of members. -- (1) if (a) the ..... name of any person - (i) is without sufficient cause, entered in the register of members of a company ; or (ii) after having been ..... 'agrees in writing' mentioned in sub-section (2) were substituted for the word 'agrees' by parliamentary act 65 of 1960. the companies (amendment) bill, 1959, contained a note on clause (14) which says that 'the proposed amendment is intended to avoid the improper fastening of liability as contributories on person who never applied for shares', .....

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Rama Devi and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : 2000ACJ1016

..... force with effect from 1.7.1989 but inasmuch as it was prior to 14.11.1994, the date on which the motor vehicles (amendment) act, 1994 (central act 54 of 1994), came into force, the insurance company cannot be made liable for the compensation awarded in respect of the death of brij lal in a goods vehicle and that the ratio ..... also the language of those provisions to appreciate the stand taken now for the appellant insurance company that the language of sections 146 and 147 of the 1988 act prior to its amendment in 1994 by the central act 54 of 1994 was not in any manner different to render a different approach in the construction of sections 146 and 147 ..... goods or his authorised representative carried in the vehicle, were not covered prior to such amendment within the scope of the provisions of section 147(1)(b) of the 1988 act. we, therefore, see no merit, in the said contention on behalf of the insurance company.14. our attention has also been brought to the decision in amrit lal sood v. .....

Sunil Kumar Vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : 2008(I)ShimLC24

..... co. ltd. v. sujir ganesh nayak & company and anr.'s case supra, the similar clause was held to be valid. based upon it the division bench of madras high court also held in oriental insurance co. ltd. v. k.v. bank ltd. : air2001mad489 that section 28 amended by amendment act of 1997 is prospective in nature.15. in ..... senior advocate, for the plaintiff (appellant) has forcefully argued that the provision of section 28 of the contract act, as amended, would apply to a pending case and holding the clause of the agreement as bar that insurance company is not liable for the loss after expiration of the twelve months after happening of the loss defeat the ..... provision of the limitation act, therefore, it is void. even otherwise, the claim was filed within the limitation. therefore, .....

Kalyan Singh and ors. Vs. State of H.P. and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : 2006(1)ShimLC41

..... within such further period as the state government may allow.19. the situation changed after coming into force of the amendment of 1974 act in 2001. out of 100 bighas of land leased to the respondent company, 84.15 bighas detailed in para 2, sub-para (ii) of the petition was owned and possessed by the ..... amendment act of 2001, the proprietary rights in the village common land earlier vested in the state government were re-vested with the land owners of village shiva rudana. in consequence, the state government restored the ownership and possession of 'shamlat land' of shiva rudana estate to the original owners by mutation no. 877 attested on may 21, 2004.5. the respondent company ..... scheme/plan and complying with all the environmental and other related laws. according to the respondent company, the petitioners have no right either to the land in question or to the minerals therein even after the amendment of 1974 act in the year 2001. it is though not disputed that the land of which lease was .....

Sadh Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and anr.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : 1996ACJ880

..... by the apex court in padma srinivasan's case, 1982 acj 191 (sc), that though section 95(2)(a) of the motor vehicles act, 1939, was amended by amending act, 1969, the liability of the insurance company in respect of third party risk would extend to the legal provision as it stood on the date of the accident. we are of ..... premier insurance co. ltd. 1982 acj 191 (sc). in that case the apex court considered the amending act of 1969 in respect of section 95(2)(a) of the motor vehicles act, 1939, vis-a-vis the liability of the insurance company and held that insurance of motor vehicles in respect of third party risk, the liability of the insurer ..... cannot be any dispute that in the present claim petitions also, the liability of the insurance company would be limited to the contract of insurance.52. various decisions were placed before this court regarding amending section 92-a, which was added by the amending act of 1982. this section regarding 'no fault liability' was discussed in some of the .....

Sadh Ram and ors. Vs. State of H.P. and anr.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : 2(1996)ACC218

..... ratio laid down by the apex court in padma srinivasan's case (supra) that though section 95(2)(a) of the motor vehicles act, 1939 was amended by amending act, 1969, the liability of the insurance company in respect of 3rd party risk would extend to the legal provision as it stood on the date of the accident. we are of ..... apex court in padma srinivasan v. : [1982]3scr244 in that case the apex court considered the amending act of 1969 in respect of section 95(2)(a) of the motor vehicles act, 1939 vis-a-vis the liability of the insurance company and held that insurance of motor vehicles in respect of 3rd party risk, the liability of the insurer ..... cannot be any dispute that in the present claim petitions also, the liability of the insurance company would be limited to the contract of insurance.43. various decisions were placed before this court regarding amending section 92-a, which was added by the amending act of 1982. this section regarding 'no fault liability' was discussed in some of the .....

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Nako Alias Naiku Devi and ors ...

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : 1996ACJ516,[1996(74)FLR2765],(1996)IILLJ1015HP

..... place prior to the amendment of the schedule iv of the act, the compensation has to be assessed according to unamended schedule. we say so as if retrosepective operation is given to the amended schedule, it will take away the rights of the parties, namely, the owner as well as the insurance company, in this regard. ..... therefore, the commisioner erred in law in assessing the compensation under the amended ..... (hereinafter referred to as the act) as amended, a sum of rs. 44,200 was assessed as compensation along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum and the liability for the compensation was fixed on the insurance company, namely, the present appellant. being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.3. the appeal .....