Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: deposit insurance and credit guarantee corporation act 1961 section 31 reserve fund Page 12 of about 6,756 results (0.264 seconds)

M/S Manpower Services India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner-cum- ...

Court : Delhi

..... the petitioner. the respondent witnesses deposed on oath the relevant facts and also proved the necessary documents. rw1 mr. r.s. chauhan, joint director, esic, hq proved the notice issued to the petitioner whereby the petitioner was called for personal hearing on 19.04.2010 and deposed that none appeared on ..... fao no.30/2014 20th january, 2014 % m/s manpower services india pvt. ltd. ......appellant through: mr. trideep pais, advocate. versus additional commissioner-cum-regional director, esic & anr. ...... respondents through: coram: hon ble mr. justice valmiki j.mehta to be referred to the reporter or not?. valmiki j.mehta, j (oral) 1. ..... esi act.2. a reading of the impugned judgment of the esi court shows that the appellant had led evidence of one witness pw-1sh. rahul garg. the respondent led evidence of five witnesses who deposed orally, proved relevant documents and justified the imposition of penalty/damages upon the petitioner. it is further noted by the esi court that the deposition .....

Atherton Vs. Fdic

Court : US Supreme Court

..... sen. riegle) ("[t]he establishment of a federal standard of care is based 229 on the overriding federal interest in protecting the soundness of the federal deposit insurance corporation fund and is very limited in scope. it is not a wholesale preemption of longstanding principles of corporate governance ... "). to have pre-empted state law ..... 605 (1995) (providing ordinary negligence standard), as well as the different ways in which lower courts since 1891 have interpreted briggs' "federal common law" standard. compare federal deposit insurance corporation v. mason, 115 f.2d 548,551-552 (ca3 1940) (applying standard similar to simple negligence), with washington bancorporation v. said, 812 f. supp. 1256, ..... they do not point to a conflict or threat that is significant, and we shall explain why. (the respondent, by the way, is now the federal deposit insurance corporation-the fdic-which has replaced the rtc pursuant to a new federal statute. 12 u. s. c. 1441a(b)(4)(a).) first, the fdic invokes .....

Rewant and ors. Vs. Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1985Bom75

..... corporation to pay the surrender value to the petitioners. this could at the most be subject matter of a suit if there is not other remedy available under the insurance act. we, therefore, find that the writ petition is not maintainable.9. for the above said two reasons, therefore, we find that the writ petition stands ..... the writ-petition. he has has submitted that in fact the writ-petition is filed by the petitioners to enforce a right which flows from the contract of insurance and such a writ-petition would not be maintainable under art. 226 of the constitution. he also submitted that there is no statutory obligation or duty cast ..... respectively. their father, who is admittedly their natural guardian, had obtained 17 policies of life insurance from the 2nd respondent. on the advice given by an insurance agent, he decided to surrender five of them and to invest the surrender value in fixed deposits. out of these five policies, he assigned two policies to his wife under an irrevocable .....

U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Through Its Regional Manager Vs. ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : [2008(119)FLR982]; (2009)IILLJ247All

..... order passed in various writ petitions, the employer could not deduct the employees share of contribution from their wages, hence same was not deposited with the employees state insurance corporation. though under section 40 of the act principal employer is duty bound to pay the contribution as defined under section 2(4 ..... year 1985, no contribution could be deducted by the petitioner-corporation from the salary of its employees under the employees insurance act and nor could it be deposited with the employees state insurance corporation. moreover, in view of the interim orders, the 'contribution' under the act also could not be recovered ..... remedy under section 75 of the act. in the meantime neither the contribution was deposited by the principal employees nor any benefits were given under the employees state insurance act since 1985; that the employees state insurance corporation again revived executing proceedings against the the petitioner and issued recovery certificates amounting to .....

Sasadhar Chakravarty and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : (1996)136CTR(SC)258

..... , for the purpose of providing annuities to the beneficiaries, the trustees accumulate the contribution in respect of each beneficiary and purchase an annuity from the life insurance corporation of india at the time of retirement or death of each employee or on his becoming incapacitated prior to retirement as per r. 89(ii). ..... retirement, under the rules of the fund, the first petitioner is receiving an annuity under a policy purchased by the trustees of the fund from the life insurance corporation of india. the second petitioner is a society registered under the west bengal societies registration act, 1961. its membership consists of pensioners of various non- ..... the annuitant.4. rules 85 and 89 are meant to safeguard the moneys deposited in the superannuation fund and to secure to the annuitant the annuity amount. undoubtedly, r. 89 requires the trustees to purchase an annuity from the life insurance corporation of india to the exclusion of anyone else. but this provision must .....

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. National Co-operative Consumer Federat ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : AIR2009Delhi173

..... in godown or at the port. the witness had never dealt with the particular policy in issue. he admitted that in open marine insurance policy, some deposits are taken from the insured which are adjusted after declaration is made by the insured from time to time. no demand was made by the appellant which was not paid by the respondent.24. we find force ..... godown or at the ports for a maximum period of 45 days. the rates of additional premium for the insurance cover during storage were specified at the rate of rs. 0.03 % per month or part thereof and that the bill for deposit of premium of rs. 25,001/- had already been delivered to the respondent and a copy of which ..... any risk in india in respect of any insurance business on which premium is not ordinarily payable outside india unless and until the premium payable is received by him or is guaranteed to be paid by such person in such manner and within such time as may be prescribed or unless and until deposit of such amount as may be prescribed, .....

Radha Kanta Pal Vs. United Bank of India Ltd.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1955Cal217

..... defendant nishikanta is rs. 3513-2-0 for which the bank claims to be reimbursed out of the other g. p. note as security deposit and the sum of rs. 306/- being the surrender value of the insurance policy of nishikanta and a further sum of rs. 294-14-3 being the outstanding balance of the provident fund of the defendant nishikanta ..... defendant nishi kanta pal is concerned and must therefore be accepted as against him. as against the plaintiff these two amounts being the proceeds of the surrender value of the insurance policy and of the provident fund account are admitted by him. therefore, although defendant nishi kanta pal did not himself pay any part of the shortage of rs. 8,800 ..... /- to the comilla banking corporation, credit on his account must be given for the sum of rs. 600-14-3, being the total of the two sums of rs. 306/- and rs. 294-14-3 and .....

Employees' State Insurance Corporation and Anr. Vs. Birla Corporation ...

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (2005)2CALLT637(HC),2005(3)CHN547,[2005(107)FLR560]

..... a principal employer and the corporation in respect of any contribution or any other dues shall be raised by the principal employer in the employees' insurance court unless he has deposited with the court fifty per cent of the amount due from him as claimed by the corporation. proviso to section 75(2b) of the act ..... moitra, on the other hand, has submitted on behalf of the petitioners that in the instant case jurisdictional error has arisen because the employees' insurance court has reduced the amount to be deposited without recording reasons and such failure to record reasons goes to the root of exercising of jurisdiction as contemplated under proviso to section 75(2b ..... the said notice of demand to defaulters. by the impugned order being order no. 3 dated 22nd september, 2003 the learned judge, employees' insurance court, west bengal directed the opposite party to deposit a sum of rs. 7,000/- by 28th october, 2003 with the corporation who should hold the same in trust and the ultimate .....

Ran India Steels Vs. Regional Director of Employee State Insurance Cor ...

Court : Chennai

..... dispute between a principal employer and the corporation in respect of any contribution or any other dues shall be raised by the principal employer in the employees' insurance court unless he has deposited with the court fifty per cent of the amount due from him as claimed by the corporation. provided that the court may, for reasons to be ..... claims, the appellant filed e.s.i.o.p.nos.60 of 2008 and 52 of 2008 respectively. instead of depositing 50% of the claim amount as per the condition found in section 75 (2-b) of employees' state insurance act, 1948 [hereinafter referred to as the act]., relying on the proviso empowering the court to waive the condition ..... or reduce the amount to be deposited, the appellant filed two interlocutory applications in both the e.s.i.o.ps. they were taken .....

Mohinder Pal Singh vs.upender Paswan & Ors

Court : Delhi

..... in dispute that the injured-employee has to be compensated, be it under the compensation act, or under the esi act. monies have been deposited under the workmen s compensation act. if any monies are granted under the esi act, the appellant can be re-imbursed to the extent of payment made by them. since the issue raised in this ..... date of filing of the petition i.e. 15.03.2015. the appellant has deposited the requisite amount. the award is challenged on the ground that an insurance cover under the employees state insurance act, 1948 (esi act) was sought on 25.02.2013 and insurance cover was granted to the employee concerned alongwith other employees of the appellant w.e. ..... such specific directions given under the judgment e.i. court was bound to order reimbursement of the amount deposited by opposite party to satisfy the claim of the employee when such employee was proved to be an insured person under the act. if the corporation is having statutory empowerment under section 68 of the act to .....