Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Jan-06-1993
Reported in : (1993)ILLJ1168Raj; 1993(1)WLC415
..... under section 5a and section 5b, respectively, of the employees' provident fund and miscellaneous provisions act, 1952 (19 of 1952), or the 'indian airlines' and 'air india' corporations established under section 3 of the air corporations act, 1953 (27 of 1953), or the life insurance corporation of india established under section 3 of the life insurance corporation act, 1956 (31 of 1956), or the oil and natural gas commission established under section 3 of the oil and natural gas commission act, 1959 (43 of 1959), or the deposit insurance and credit guarantee corporation established under section 3 of the deposit and credit guarantee corporation act, 1961 (47 of 1961) or thecentral warehousing corporation establisbed under section 3 of the warehousing corporation act, 1962 ..... (supra), the reference made by the state government was to the effect that all workers who are working with thecontractors on permanent jobs should be made permanent and recruitment from outside be stopped. this court examined the scope of the provisions of 1947 act vis-a-vis provisions of 1970 act and held that terms and conditions of employment of contract labour are regulated by the provisions of 1970 act and, therefore, the provisions of industrial disputes act are not applicable. the learned single judge noted that, 'in the present case, there does not appear to be any dispute between the parties that the contract labour was employed under the provisions .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jul-09-1993
Reported in : AIR1994Cal1,[1996]87CompCas139(Cal)
ORDER1. An application under Section 543(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 was filed on 16-9-91 for and on behalf of the Official Liquidator by way of a Judge's Summons which are, inter alia, as follows:'1. Declaration that the Respondents and each of them, who were the Directors of the Company abovenamed at the time of winding up thereof and at all material times have misapplied, misappropriated and/ or retained and/ or become liable and/ or accountable for Rs. 72,87,903.86 p. and/or gulty of misfeasance and breach of trust in relation to the said Company on the following grounds:--(a) The respondents have misappropriated a sum of Rs. 1,11,00,260.18 p. being the money lent and advanced by secured creditors and the said Respondents are bound to restore the sum of Rs. 1,11,00,260.18 p. together with interest thereon at the rate of 18% per annum being the prevailing rate charged by the Nationalised Banks from the date of liquidation until realisation.(b) The Respondents and/ or each of them ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-15-1993
Reported in : AIR1994Delhi126; [1997]89CompCas785(Delhi); 52(1993)DLT560; 1994(28)DRJ228
ORDERD. P. Wadhwa, J.Rule D. B. 1. There are two petitioners. First petitioner is a public limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, and the second petitioner is the Director of the first petitioner. By this petition they seek to have issued a writ, direction or order in the nature of certiorari quashing the award of contract by respondents 1, 2 and 3 to respondent No. 4 for printing, binding and supply of telephone directory for Hyderabad. Then the petitioners seek a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus requiring the respondents 1, 2 and 3 to accept the tender of the first petitioner for the purpose aforementioned. The first respondent is the Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Communication, NewDelhi; the second is the Chairman, Telecom Commission, Ministry of Communication, New Delhi; the third is the General Manager, Department of Telecommunications, Telecom District, Hyderabad; and the fourth respondent is M/s. M. & N. Publications Limit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-05-1993
Reported in : 1994ACJ325
Bhawani Singh, Actg. C.J. 1. On 5.8.1991, the petitioner sent a communication to the Chief Justice of this court. Consequently, the matter was ordered to be registered on the judicial side Hence, the present writ petition before us.2. The petitioner has stated that on 3.5.1987, while passing through the road, he stopped at a place where bus No. 6322 of the respondent Corporation was standing. The driver and the conductor of this bus had lit fire beneath the diesel tank. On account of formation of gases the pressure in the tank increased, the diesel tank burst and caught fire and engulfed the petitioner as well as the conductor of the bus. Thereafter he was admitted in Civil Hospital, Theog, where he remained till 10.12.1987. In between this period, he was also admitted in Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Shimla, from 18.8.1987 to 24.8.1987. According to the petitioner, he again remained admitted in the same hospital from 12.4.1988 to 14.5.1988.3. The petitioner has stated th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-06-1993
Reported in : 1994ACJ1; AIR1994SC1631; 1994(1)ALT1(SC); (1994)96BOMLR788; 1994(3)KarLJ39; 1994(1)KLT67(SC); 1994(0)MPLJ520; (1994)107PLR1; 1993(4)SCALE643; (1994)2SCC176
1. The Kerala State Road Transport Corporation seeks special leave to appeal to this Court from the judgment dated 9th March, 1992 of the High Court of Kerala in M.F.A. No. 661 of 1986 enhancing compensation in a fatal accident action from a sum of Rs. 58,760/- to a sum of Rs. 2,64,000/-. The respondents-claimants are the parents, widow and the children of Thomas Philip, aged 38 years who died in an unfortunate motor-accident that occurred on 19.2.1984 at a place called Plamood Junction at Pullad on Thiruvalla-Kozhancherry in the State of Kerala involving a bus owned by the appellant. We have heard learned Counsel on both sides. Special leave granted.The deceased Thomas Philip at the time of this unfortunate and untimely death was employed in the newspaper establishment of 'Malayala Manorama' on a monthly salary of Rs. 1032/-. These facts and the fact that the accident was the result of actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the bus are not disputed.2. The Motor Accidents C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-12-1993
Reported in : JT1993(1)SC128; 1993(1)SCALE98; (1993)2SCC37; [1993]1SCR124
1. These are batch of appeals against the judgment of Delhi High Court dated 1st March, 1990 whereby the High Court by a common judgment disposed of a bunch of writ petitions, inter alia, filed by Gulab Rai against the Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.2. The challenge in the writ petitions was to the Resolution of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as M.C.D.) whereby it approved the proposal of the Delhi Electricity Supply Committee (in short D.E.S.C.) to enhance minimum consumption guarantee charges from Rs. 40/- per KVA to Rs. 340/- per KVA in respect of arc/induction furnaces.3. The petitioners in the writ petitions has set up/installed arc/induction furnaces for the manufacture of castings and have their factories in Delhi.4. One of the important raw-materials for the writ petitioners is electricity. Each of the petitioners had obtained electricity from the respondents and the sanctioned load is more than 100K WS. The exact sanctioned load, among the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-12-1993
Reported in : 49(1993)DLT630; 1993(27)DRJ95
Yogeshwar Dayal, J. (1) These are batch of appeals against the judgment of Delhi High Court dated 1/03/1990 whereby the HighCourt by a common judgment disposed of a bunch of writ petitions, interalia, filed by Gulab Rai against the Municipal Corporation of Delhi andothers.(2) The challenge in the writ petitions was to the Resolution of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as M.C.D.) Whereby it approved the proposal of the Delhi Electricity Supply Committee (in short D.E.S.U.) to enhance minimum consumption guarantee charges fromRs. 40.00 per K.VA to Rs. 340.00 per Kva in respect of arc/induction furnaces.(3) The petitioners in the writ petitions had set up/installed are/induction furnaces for the manufacture of castings and have their factories in Delhi.(4) One of the important raw-materials for the writ petitioners iselectricity. Each of the petitioners had obtained electricity from the respondents and the sanctioned load is more than 100 KWS. The exact sanction...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jan-12-1993
Reported in : [1993]201ITR785(Cal)
Ajit k. Sengupta, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following question of law has fallen for determination by us :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that, for the purpose of calculation of interest payable to the assessee under Section 214 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the order passed by the Income-tax Officer in pursuance of the appellate order revising the original assessment constituted 'regular assessment' ?'2. Briefly, the facts leading to the question are as under :The assessee is a company and the assessment year involved is 1975-74, the accounting period ending on November 30, 1972. The Income-tax Officer raised an advance tax demand of Rs. 92,178 under Section 210 of the Act, payable in three equal instalments on June 15, 1972, September 15, 1972, and February 15, 1973. After receipt of the said demand notice, the assessee filed an estimate of its income before the Income-...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-14-1993
Reported in : [1995]216ITR584(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata Manohar J.1. For the assessment year 1968-69, the applicant (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') declared a total dividend of Rs. 6,90,000. This dividend was in excess of ten per cent. of the share capital of the company on the first day of the previous year which was Rs. 30,00,000. Therefore, the excess dividend so declared amounted to Rs. 3,90,000. Such excess dividend entailed an additional income-tax under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1968. The Income-tax Officer, however, failed to take note of this fact at the time of the assessment proceedings. He thereupon initiated rectification proceedings under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee resisted the proceedings. The assessee contended that the declaration of dividend of Rs. 6,90,000 was out of profits which were exempted from tax under section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and hence no additional income-tax was leviable on the excess dividend declared by the assessee. The Income-tax Off...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-15-1993
Reported in : AIR1993SC1530; JT1993(1)SC139; (1993)ILLJ939SC; 1993(1)SCALE130; (1993)2SCC9; [1991]3SCR307
ORDER1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Kerala in M.F.A. No. 800/90 dated 18.12.90. The short facts leading to this appeal are as under:2. The respondent-Hotel is situated in Kaloor, Cochin 17. It is a commercial establishment. In July 1985 this establishment obtained a Bar licence whereupon a Bar was started. After running the business for some time it was closed down with effect from 31.3.88.3. The Insurance Inspectors of the appellant verified the records of the respondent-establishment on 29.9.87,9.10.87 and 19.10.87. It was reported that the employment strength of the respondent- establishment including Chembaka Restaurant and Mayuri Bar was more than 19 as on 17.7.85. Therefore, it was treated as covered under the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with effect from 11.7.85 provisionally. The fact of coverage was intimated to the respondent by notice dated 21.3.88. Since the final date of cov...
Tag this Judgment!