Court : Punjab and Haryana
CWP No.22996 of 2012 -1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.22996 of 2012. [O&M].Date of Decision:20. h December, 2012. M/s FMI LTD.& Anr. Petitioners through Mr.Yash Raj Deora, Advocate Versus Union of India & ORS.Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. SURYA KANT, J. (1) The prayer in this petition is to strike down Section 33 of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 to the extent it prescribes imposition of penalty for the use of unverified weight or measure on the seller, distributor or the person who delivers or otherwise transfeRs.as according to the petitioner, the aforesaid provision ultra-vires Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners also seek quashing of the condition mentioned in Form LM-3 [Annexure P-...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2009(1)KCCR5(SN)
(This writ petition is filed under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of India praying to quash the communication dated 6-12-2004 issued by the first respondent vide annexure-k, in so far as it recommends the grant of mining lease to respondents 4 and 5, and etc.)Writ petition is by a limited company, which has filed an application on 16-4-2003 [copy at Annexure-C to the writ petition] seeking for lease of an extent of 298.5 ha. of land for mining operation for a period of 30 years to exploit iron ore from the said government land and in response to a government notification dated 15-3-2003 [copy at Annexure-B to the writ petition] informing the general public that the areas mentioned in the annexure to the notification are available for regrant under Rule 59 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 [for short, the Rules]; that such an application will be considered in accordance with the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 [for short, the Act] ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2009(1)Kar924:2009(2)KCCRSN63:2009(3)KLJ99:2009(3)AIRKarR120:AIR2009NOC2202.
ORDERRam Mohan Reddy, J.1. Common questions of fact and that of law arise for decision-making. Hence, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the petitions are clubbed together, finally heard and are disposed of by this order.2. The Petitioner a manufacturer of sports goods including Footwear has its authorised dealers in Belgaum amongst others in all parts of this country. On 29-03-2006, and 5.4.2006, the 4th respondent is said to have searched the showroom of the petitioner's distributor M/s. Square Cut and M/s. Foot Mark respectively and seized shoes in packages said to be in violation of Sections 39, 63 of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (for short 'Act) read with Rules 33(v) and 23(1) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities), Rules, 1977 (for short 'PC Rules'). The inspection, it is said, disclosed that the package in which the shoe was packed, did not contain the Maximum Retail Price (M.R.P.) inclusive of all taxes, in viola...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 162(2009)DLT475; 2009(242)ELT207(Del)
Sanjiv Khanna, J.1. The petitioner, M/s. Reebok India Company has filed the present Writ Petition for declaration that the provisions of Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as SWM Act, for short) and Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as SWM Rules, for short) are not applicable to them. The petitioner has also prayed for direction to release goods seized for the alleged violation of SWM Act and SWM Rules vide seizure memo dated 17th July, 2006. By the aforesaid seizure memo, the respondent No. 3- Inspector of Legal Metrology, Government of NCT of Delhi had seized a pair of footwear with the label which did not mention that the maximum retail price was inclusive of all taxes. By another notice the petitioner was asked to inform whether they would like the offence of incorrect labeling to be compounded under Section 65 of the SWM Act. The said footwear was imported by the petitioner from Vietnam a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1987]61CompCas548(Bom)
M.L. Pendse, J.1. The plaintiffs, Tri-Sure India Ltd., have instituted this suit on September 20, 1978, for recovery of sum of Rs. 63,84,792 with interest thereon at the rate of 16.25% per annum from the date of the suit till recovery and costs of the suit from the defendants.2. The plaintiffs were incorporated as a private limited company in West Bengal under the name of Indian Flange Mfg. Co. Ltd. on February 10, 1960. The name was changed to Tri-Sure India (Pvt.) Ltd. on April 22, 1960, and the registered office was transferred to Bombay in the middle of the year 1962. The company was a wholly-owned subsidiary of American Flange Mfg. Co., United States of America. On February 24, 1975, the plaintiffs became a public limited company. The financial year of the plaintiffs is from September 1, to August 31.3. Defendant No. 1 is a partnership firm of chartered accountants and is carrying on business for last over 85 years and has acquired reputation all over the country. Defendants Nos. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Cav Judgment: (Chief Justice) This group of writ petitions challenges the constitutional validity of sections 14 and 17 of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (Slum Act, for brevity). 2. In Mumbai city, otherwise known as the commercial capital of India, more than half the population resides in slums. While ordinarily we look at proliferation of slums as merely in terms of encroachments and unauthorised constructions, the draft National Slum Policy formulated by the Government of India in the Department of Urban Development and Poverty Alleviation recognises that slums are an integral part of urban areas and contribute significantly to their economy both through their labour market contributions and informal production activities. The draft policy, therefore, endorses an upgrading and improvement approach in all slums. The policy further acknowledges that cities without slums should be the goal and objective of all urban planning for social a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Vibhu Bakhru, J. 1. These petitions have been filed by Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Publ), a company incorporated under the Laws of Sweden (hereafter also referred to as 'Ericsson'), inter alia, impugning orders dated 12th November, 2013 and 16th January, 2014 (hereafter referred to as the 'impugned order' or 'impugned orders') passed by the Competition Commission of India (hereafter 'CCI') under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereafter referred to as 'the Competition Act'). The impugned order dated 12th November, 2013 was passed pursuant to an information filed by Micromax Informatics Ltd. (hereafter 'Micromax') under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act and the same is the subject matter of W.P.(C) No. 464/2014 (hereafter also referred to as the 'Micromax Petition') and the impugned order dated 16th January, 2014 was passed pursuant to an information filed by Intex Technologies (India) Ltd. (hereafter 'Intex') and is the subject matter of W.P. (C) No. 1006 of 2014...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
1. Plaintiffs have filed this suit against the defendant for permanent injunction praying therein that defendants, its directors, employees, officers etc. be restrained from making, using, selling, distributing, advertising, exporting, offering for sale or dealing in Sitagliptin Phosphate Monohydrate or any other salt of Sitagliptin in any form, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or from doing any other thing that infringes the claimed subject matter of the plaintiffsIndian Patent No. 209816. Damages, rendition of accounts and delivery up of the infringing materials has also been prayed. 2. Briefly stated, plaintiffs have alleged in the plaint that plaintiff no. 1 was formally known as Merck and Company, Inc. Plaintiff no. 1 has been incorporated under the laws of New Jersey, USA, having its principal place of business at Whitehouse Station, USA. Plaint has been signed and verified by its constituted Attorney- Mr. K.G. Ananthakrishnan. Plaintiff no.2 is a licensee of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring the Rule Part I (iii)-3 of the APCA Service Rules, 1997 as null and void and unconstitutional as far as the existing retirement age of 58 years concerned and direct the first respondent to implement G.O.Ms.No.147 Finance (HRM-IV) Finance Department dated 30.06.2014 passed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh to the members of petitioner union thereby fixing the retirement age as 60 years on superannuation with retrospective effect invoking the provisions of Rule Part II(i)-28 and Rule Part II (ix)-9 of APCA Service Rules, 1997 duly reinstating the members of the petitioner union those who were relieved from service at the age of 58 years into service and permit them to draw back wages, continuity of service with all other attended benefits thereon within a time frame as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. S. Manikumar, J. 1. Claiming himself to be the President of RICA ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per V.M. Kanade, J.) 1. By this Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Petitioner is seeking a writ, order or direction for quashing and setting aside FIR no. 26(A)/2010 which is registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation for the offences punishable under section 120B read with section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (For short "PC Act") 2. Brief facts are as under:- FACTS 3. Petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner in the year 1997 and was later on promoted to the post of Regional Provident Fund Commissioner on 03/02/2005 with effect from 23/10/2003. 4. Sometime in 2008, one Mr. Vijay Patil, President, Maharashtra Kamgar Ekta Union made a complaint to the Petitioner regarding evasion of employees provident fund contribution of 2000 employees of M/s Pratibha Industries Limited. An inquiry was initiated by the Petitioner on...
Tag this Judgment!