Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-22-2001
Reported in : 2001(4)MPHT66; 2001(3)MPLJ246
..... ; (b) in the service or pay of a local authority, a corporation established by or under a central, provincial or state act or a government company as defined in section 617 of the companies act, 1956 (1 of 1956).' 6. it would be clear from the aforesaid that the case of the applicant would be covered by sub-section 12 (b) of section 21 of the penal code. he is alleged to have served under the lic which would be a corporation withinthe meaning of the above sub-section. life insurance corporation of india is established under the life insurance corporation act, 1956, therefore, it is a corporation within the meaning of sub-section 12 (b) of section 21 of the penal code. if the applicant be in the service or pay of lic, then he ..... right of carrying on the life insurance business by itself and no other agency was permitted to do so. section 43-2a of the lic act, 1956 retains the effect of section 42 of the insurance act of 1938 vis-a-vis the lic and provinces that an agent shall have same relation as holder of license as he had with the controller under the act of 1956. section 42 of the insurance act, 1938 clearly defines the position of an agent vis-a-vis the controller or an officer as he existed prior to passing of the lic act, 1956. it appears from that section that prior to passing of the lic act, 1956, the private corporations or companies had given a licence to the insurance agents for performing their .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-10-2001
Reported in : AIR2002SC350; [2002]108CompCas193(SC); (2002)1CompLJ205(SC); [2002(1)JCR339(SC)]; JT2001(10)SC466; (2002)ILLJ550SC; 2001(8)SCALE541; (2002)2SCC333; [2002]35SCL182(SC); 2002
Kirpal, J.1. The validity of the decision of the Union of India to disinvest and transfer 51% shares of M/s Bharat Aluminium Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'BALCO') is the primary issue in these cases.2. BALCO was incorporated in 1965 as a Government of India Undertaking under the Companies Act, 1956. Prior to its disinvestments it had a paid-up share capital of Rs. 488.85 crores which was owned and controlled by the Government of India. The company is engaged in the manufacture of aluminium and had plants at Korba in the State of Chhattisgarh and Bidhanbag in the State of West Bengal. The Company has integrated aluminium manufacturing plant for the manufacture and sale of aluminium metal including wire rods and semi-fabricated products.3. The Government of Madhya Pradesh vide its letter dated 18th March, 1968 wrote to BALCO stating that it proposed that land be granted to it on a 99 years lease subject to the terms and conditions contained therein. The letter envisaged gi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : May-02-2001
Reported in : 2001(5)MPHT425
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. The factual matrix and the question of law being similar in these writ petitions they were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common order. For the sake of clarity and convenience the facts in W.P. No. 6905/2000 are herein depicted.2. The petitioner, Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') was established by notification dated 1st September 1956 under Section 3 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956. The affairs of the Corporation are governed by the aforesaid Act and the Rules framed thereunder as well as under the Insurance Act, 1938. The central office of the Corporation is located at Jeevan Bima Marg, Bombay and under the Central Office there are Zonal Offices. The Central Zonal Office is located at Bhopal controlling the Divisional and Branch Offices in the entire State of Madhya Pradesh. There is a Divisional Office at Raipur and under the said Divisional Office there are a number of Branch Offices....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-31-2001
Reported in : 2002ACJ1146
Arun Kumar Goel, J.1. It is proposed to dispose of all these appeals and cross-objections by a common judgment as they have arisen out of the same accident and were disposed of by a common award passed by the Tribunal below.2. Facts regarding which learned Counsel for the parties were not at variance at the time of hearing of these appeals are that the bus bearing registration No. HPN 984 was on its way from Renukaji to Nahan town on 21.7.1993. Respondent Ram Par-kash was its driver. Himachal Road Transport Corporation (H.R.T.C. for short), was the owner of this bus. When it reached near Do-Sardka at about 12.45 p.m. on Nahan Road, it met with an accident. Claimants in all these cases (as well as other cases which were filed and settled before the Tribunal below), pleaded that this was due to excessive speed at which the bus was being driven. And also because driver lost control. This resulted in bus going off the road. It rolled down and fell 100 ft. below the road. A number of person...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-26-2001
Reported in : 2002(2)ALD96; 2002(2)ALT473
V.V.S. Rao, J .Introduction:1. The constitutional validity of Rule 3(2) of the A.P. Medical Colleges (Admission into Post-graduate Medical Courses) Rules, 1997 ( for brevity 'the Rules') insofar as the same does not consider the petitioners as 'in service' candidates for the purpose of admission into Post Graduate Medical Courses and insofar as the same prescribes six years continuous regular service in specified Government service, is the subject -matter of these writ petitions.2. In most of writ petitions, the amendment issued to the Rules in G.O.Ms. No. 279, dated 9-7-2001, denying the benefit of reservation as 'in service' candidates to these who had already acquired PG degree/diploma qualification prior to or after their entry into service, is challened. In a couple of cases, G.O. Ms. No.260, dated 10-7-1997, whereunder the Rules were made, as indicated hereinabove, is challenged. The grounds of challenge in both the groups of writ petitions are thesame, and therefore, they are di...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Dec-21-2001
Reported in : I(2003)ACC56; 2003ACJ791; ILR2002KAR675; 2002(2)KarLJ358
H.N. Narayan, J.1. This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award of the Tribunal restricting the compensation to a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- claimed by them in the claim petition as against the global compensation of Rs. 5,86,940/-, which according to the Tribunal is just and reasonable compensation.2. It is contended by the appellants among other grounds of appeal that the Tribunal has erred in restricting the award to the sum claimed in the claim petition, which is against the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, as the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act has given wide powers to the Tribunal to make just and reasonable awards. Simultaneously, the claimants have also claimed for enhancement of compensation with interest at 12% instead of 6% granted by the Tribunal.3. An application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure is filed by the claimants-appellants for amendment of the claim petition to amend the quantum of compensation from Rs. 3,50,000/- t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-21-2001
Reported in : 96(2002)DLT189; 2002(62)DRJ77
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. The short question which arises for consideration in this appeal is as towhether the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (in short, AIIMS) requires anylicense for running a medical store.2. The appellant herein was having an outlet for selling drugs/medicinesto general public within the premises of AIIMS. AIIMS granted license to theappellant to run the aforesaid outlet. The AIIMS withdrew this license and bycommunication dated July, 1997 asked the appellant to vacate the premises for the with.As the appellant did not vacate the premises, action was initiated under the provisionsof the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act and an evictionorder was passed. Against the eviction order the appellant preferred an appeal whichwas dismissed by the Addl District Judge vide order dated 18th July, 2001.3. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant herein filed a writ petition No.4800/2001. The said writ petition was disposed of on 17th August, 2001. Upon hisfiling...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-20-2001
Reported in : AIR2002Bom295; (2002)1BOMLR762; 2002(2)MhLj807
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J. 1. Heard the learned advocates for the parties. Perused the records.2. This appeal arises from the judgment and order passed by the Additional Chief Judge of Court of Small Causes, Bombay in Municipal Appeal No. M/1979 of 1985 on 18th November, 1988. By the impugned judgment, the Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the Appellants against the order dated 31st July 1985 by the Investigating Officer whereby the rateable value of the premises in question was modified to Rs. 8,65,850/- from Rs. 7,78,000/- per annum with effect from 1st April, 1982.3. Few facts relevant for the decision are that the Appellants are the owners of a building known as 'Nirlon House' at Worli consisting of basement, ground floor and five other floors. The construction of the building was completed in the year 1968 and a part thereof was let out whereas the remaining part was occupied by the Appellants. The rateable value of the building was fixed at Rs. 7,74,180/-. The notice...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-19-2001
Reported in : II(2002)ACC625; 2003ACJ59; 2002(2)ALD569; 2002(3)ALT343
ORDER1. This appeal and the cross-objections arise out of an award made in OP No. 774 of 1993 dated 29-4-1997 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge, at Tirupati (for short 'the Tribunal'). Since the appeal and the cross-objections arise out of the same award made in OP No. 774 of 1993, they are being disposed of by the following common order.2. There are two appellants in CMA No. 1726 of 1997, the first appellant being the owner of the offending lorry bearing No. AAC 7477 who is a resident of Balaji Nagar, Greamspet, Chittoor and the second appellant is the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Chittoor - insurer of the offending vehicle AAC 7477. These two appellants have chosen to assail the award passed by the Tribunal granting a total compensation of Rs. 98,40,500/-with interest at 12% per annum from the date of the petitioner till the date of realisation, to the respondents-claimants herein. The respondents-claimants have also filed cross-objections ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Dec-18-2001
Reported in : 93(2002)CLT337
B. Panigrahi, J.1. The writ petitioner has challenged the legality, propriety and validity of the order by which opp. parties 1 and 5 have appointed opp. party No. 7 as the President of the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Bhadrak (In short 'District Forum') on the ground, interalia, that opp. party No. 7 practised fraud and misrepresentation while procuring the order of appointment in his favour.2. Opp. party No. 3 issued an advertisement calling upon the candidates for the post of President, District Forum which were lying vacant in different districts of Orissa on 5.12.2000. The petitioner vis-a-vis opp. party No. 7 along with other candidates had applied for the post of President in the District forum, Bhadrak. Subsequently opp. party No. 5 issued a letter inviting the petitioner and other candidates to attend the interview. Petitioner as well as other candidates in terms thereof appeared in the interview where it is said that opp. party No. 7 was selected and was appointed as th...
Tag this Judgment!