Court : Patna
1. Petitioner Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) is aggrieved by the order dated 15.01.2000, Annexure-2 passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Patna whereunder it has been held that provisions of Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (herein after referred to as the Act) is applicable to the Board as Board is not covered by SubSections-(b)(c) of Section 16(1) of the Act and has further held that the Board is liable to deposit a sum of Rs.2,23,64,855/- towards the P.F. dues of the workers supplied by the contractor engaged in connection with handling of coal/removing of ash at Kanti Thermal Power Unit of the Board during the period between 1986-April, 2000. Board is also aggrieved by the order dated 23.2.2007, Annexure-1 passed by the Employees Provident Fund...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.224 of 2013 C.M. Nos.8002-8003/2013 Decided on :17. h May, 2013 MS/ TATA BLUE SCOPE STEEL LTD. Appellant Through: Mr. Ashutosh Dubey & Ms. Vriti Anand, Advs. Versus M/S SETHI GOLDEN TRANSPORT CO. Through: Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant against the order dated 16 th May, 2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge in Civil suit bearing No.282/2006 titled M/s Sethi Golden Transport Co. Vs. M/s Tata Blue Scope Steel Ltd. rejecting the application of the appellant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the plaint on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction. It may be pertinent here to mention that the respondent herein had filed a suit for recovery of `11,55,516/- from the appellant. After completion of the pleadings of the parties, an issue with regard to the territorial jurisdiction was framed on the basis of the objections purported to have bee...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sikkim
Reported in : AIR2005Sik27
ORDERN. Surjamani Singh, J. 1. These three cases involved common question of facts and laws and interrelated each other and, that being the position, these cases were taken up for hearing jointly and accordingly, these cases are finally disposed of with the following common judgment and order.2. The facts of the cases, in a short compass, are as follows :--i) The State Bank of India as plaintiffs, for short, the respondent Bank herein, initially instituted three money suits against the defendant Himalindia Photo Offset (Himalindia Publications Pvt. Ltd.) represented by the petitioner, Smt. Mala Rana Patra, for short the Judgment Debtor herein, under Civil Suit Nos. 60 of 1988, 61 of 1988 and 62 of 1988 which were decreed on 21st August, 2000 by the trial Court in the following order :-- '(i) Decree for Rs. 2,85,506.04 with PI and FI @ 12.5% per annum with effect from 4-5-1988 in Civil Suit No. 60 of 1988.(ii) Decree on admission for Rs. 1,48,537.98 plus PI and FI @ 12.5% per annum with...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
ORDERV.G. Sabhahit, J.1. These writ petitions are disposed of by this common order since they involve common question of law and fact and are filed by the same petitioner.2. It is the case of the petitioner in both these writ petitions:(i) that writ petitioner is a registered Private Limited company and is engaged in the manufacture of low ash metallurgical coke (met coke) at Porbandar and Mundra of Kutch District, Gujarat;(ii) that in response to the notification dated 15.3.2003 application was filed by the petitioner in respect of the land described in Sl. No. 12 seeking for grant of mining lease over an area of 350 and 250 acres respectively;(iii) that the application was filed for grant of mining lease contending that iron ore will be used for captive mining; and(iv) that the power of affording opportunity under Rule 26(1) of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 (hereinafter called 'the Rules') could not be delegated to the Officer subordinate to the Government as person who hears wo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1999)2CALLT170(HC),1999LabIC3796,(1999)IILLJ899Cal
S.B. Sinha, J.1. In this appeal, the appellant has questioned ajudgment and order dated 10.9.97, passed by a lea1rned single Judge of this court whereby and whereunder the writ application filed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein questioning an order dated 17.7.97 passed by the 5th industrial Tribunal. West Bengal in Case No. VIII-143/89, was set aside.2, The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute.A reference dated 9.5.89 was made by the State of West Bengal, being the appropriate Government in terms of section 10(1) of the industrial Disputes Act, in relation to the following issues:1. Wages for the period from 26.4.84 to 4.7.84. 2. Shift ditty for despatch section workmen. 3. Salary for 5.7.84 4. Encashable earned leave for 1985.The parties, after the said reference had been made, filed their respective written statements. Allegedly, the workmen had been relying upon the documents beyond their pleadings. An objection was raised by the respondent No. 1 herein and by an order d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT:- THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY,THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2013 4TH BHADRA, 1935 W.A.No.48 of 2013 ---------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).No.16951/2012, DATED 01 01-2013, OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA. ------------------- APPELLANT/ PETITIONER IN W.P.:- -------------------------------------------------- ITI LIMITED, BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER- HR, JIMMY J NALAPPAT, ITI LIMITED, KANGHIKODE, PALAKKAD. BY ADVS.SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SENIOR ADVOCATE) SRI.S.SUJIN. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS IN W.P.:- ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, PALAKKAD 014. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD 001. 3. CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 001. 4. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 001. 5. THE STATE OF...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1996(1)ALT213; 1996(1)ARBLR542(AP)
P. Venkatarama Reddi, J. 1. These two C.M.As. (CMAs. 714/88 and 759/86) are directed against the common judgment in O.P. No. 229 of 1986 and O.P. No. 195 of 1986 on the file of Principal Subordinate Judge, Visakhapatnam. O.P. No. 195 of 1986 was filed under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 by the Food Corporation of India (respondent herein) to make the award (Ex. A3) passed by the umpire on 6.7.1984 a rule of the court. O.P. No. 229 of 1986 was filed by the appellant herein under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act to set aside the award. 2. The appellant entered into a contract with the respondent for transporting bulk wheat from the Port of Sydney (Australia) to the Port of Visakhapatnam and in connection therewith, a charter party agreement was entered on 1.9.1976. A part of the consignment of wheat was damaged. The damaged wheat was sold by the respondent and a sum of Rs. 54,108/- was recovered. The respondent called upon the appellant to make good the loss suffered b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : III(2005)ACC243; 2005ACJ1170; 2004(5)ALD781; 2004(6)ALT547
C.Y. Somayajulu, J.1. Since both these Civil Miscellaneous Appeals arise out of the same claim petition, they are being disposed of by a common judgment2. For the sake of convenience, parties would hereinafter be referred as they are arrayed in the Tribunal.3. The widow and daughter of S. Rama Rao (the deceased), filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs. 11,00,000/-from Respondents 1 to 3, who are the driver and the owners of the R.T.C. Bus bearing No. AAZ 7099, and Respondent Nos. 4 and 5, who are the owner and the insurer of the car in which the deceased was proceeding, alleging that the deceased while travelling in the car of the 4th respondent died as a result of the collision between the car in which he was travelling and the bus being driven by the 1st respondent. The Tribunal having held that the accident took place due to the negligence of the drivers of both the vehicles involved in the accident awarded Rs. 3,66,000/- as compensation to the appellants against Responde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may Yes be allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the judgment should be reported Yes in Digest?1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs.92,20,562/-. The defendant-company, which was awarded the work for Biological Oxidation Plant for Coal Chemical Effluents at Rourkela Steel Plant (hereinafter referred to as "RSP), assigned the civil work for the aforesaid plant to the plaintiff for a lump sum amount of Rs.2,87,30,000/- vide Letter of Intent (hereinafter referred to as LOI) dated 15th October, 1992. The scope of work as also the commercial terms for its execution were annexed to the LOI. It is alleged that in a meeting held in the last week of February, 1993, among the plaintiff, defendant and the officials of RSP, some major changes were made in the nature of civil work which was assigned to the plaintiff and those changes involved extra work and extra price implications. Some other extra works were later e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :22. 02.2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.No.33756 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.2 of 2012 and 1 of 2013 All India General Insurance OBC Employees Welfare Association, (Regd.203/1998) represented by its General Secretary S.Sivasubramaniyan, C/o.United India Insurance Co. Limited, No.24,Whites Road, Chennai-600 014. .. Petitioner Vs. 1.United India Insurance Company Ltd., represented by its General Manager, No.24,Whites Road, Chennai-600 014. 2.National Insurance Company Limited, represented by its General Manager, No.3,Middleton Street, Kolkatta-700 071. 3.New India Assurance Company Limited represented by its General Manager, No.84, M.G.Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001. 4.Oriental Insurance Company Limited, represented by its General Manager, A/25-27, Asif Ali Road, New Delhi-110 002. 5.General Insurers' (Public Sector) Association of India (GIPSA), represented by its Chairman, 3rd Floor, Jeevan Vihar, Parliament Street, New Delhi-110 0...
Tag this Judgment!