Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Apr-06-1990
S.N. Phukan, J. 1. This Revision petition is by the Union of India through the Chief Engineer, Shillong Zone against the judgment and order of the learned Addl. Deputy Commissioner, East Khasi Hills District, Shillong, by which the learned lower appellate court affirmed the judgment of the learned Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner. 2. On first of May, 1973 a contract was entered into between the parties herein for construction of the main sewers at Dinjan within the district of Dibrugarh. The agreement was executed at Shillong. After completion of the work a dispute was raised by the contractor viz. the opposite party herein and as per the terms of the agreement it was referred to the sole arbitrator. The arbitrator gave a non-speaking award, awarding a sum of rupees five lacs and odd in favour of the contractor. It may be mentioned that during the arbitration proceeding the petitioner herein filed a petition under Sections 5 & 11 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, for short 'the A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-19-1990
Reported in : AIR1991Bom111; 1990(3)BomCR452
1. The petitioner No. 2 are a public limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act No. VII of 1913and are engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of tooth paste, cosmetics and toilet preparations. The petitioner No. 2 was incorporated in the year 1937 as a private company limited by shares. Subsequently, in the year 1978, it was converted into a public limited company and 60% of its capital is held by Indian shareholders, while the balance of 40% is held by petitioner No. 1. Petitioner No. 1 Company is incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware, U.S.A. and also carries on business of manufacture and sale of tooth paste, cosmetics and toilet preparations. The petitioner No. 2 is an Indian Company for the purpose of both the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 and the Foreign Exchange Regulations Act, 1971. The petitioner No. 2 are not a Company to which Part 'A' of Chaper III of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 applie...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-14-1990
Wilder v. Virginia Hosp. Ass'n - 496 U.S. 498 (1990) U.S. Supreme Court Wilder v. Virginia Hosp. Ass'n, 496 U.S. 498 (1990) Wilder v. Virginia Hospital Association No. 88-2043 Argued Jan. 9, 1990 Decided June 14, 1990 496 U.S. 498 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT Syllabus To qualify for federal financial assistance to help defray the cost of furnishing medical care to the needy under the Medicaid Act, States must submit to the Secretary of Health and Human Services for approval a plan which, inter alia, establishes a scheme for reimbursing health care providers. In 1980, Congress passed the Boren Amendment to the Act, which requires provider reimbursement according to rates that the "State finds, and makes assurances satisfactory to the Secretary," are "reasonable and adequate" to meet the costs of "efficiently and economically operated facilities." The State must also assure the Secretary that individuals have "reasonable access" to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : May-29-1990
Reported in : (1990)(50)ELT381TriDel
1. This is Revenue's appeal against the impugned order in appeal passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Bombay dated 18-12-1985 by which he set aside the order-in-original dated 4-1-1985 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise.2. The respondents M/s. Hico Products Ltd. are manufacturers of the products (1) Dimethicon - 20 (2) Dimethicon - 350 (3) Dimethicon - 2000 (4) Dimethicon -1000 and (5) Simethicon and (6) Dimethicon - 100. They were filing classification list for products from Sr. No. 1 to 5 under Tariff Item 68 of CET w.e.f. 10-8-19.82 for the product against Sr. No.6, they were filing classification list under Tariff Item 68 w.e.f.24-1-1983. On certain occasions, they have filed classification in respect of the above products under Tariff Item 15-A on insistence by the Central Excise officers and have paid duty under protest, claiming that these products are classifiable under Tariff Item 68.3. The Department, therefore, drew samples of the above produ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-06-1990
Reported in : 1991ACJ303; AIR1991SC392; [1991]70CompCas634(SC); JT1991(5)SC73; 1990(2)SCALE1191; (1991)1SCC357; 1991(1)LC218(SC)
ORDERLalit Mohan Sharma, J.1. This appeal by special leave arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent for a money decree for a sum of Rs. 77,805.85 being the amount due for four insurance policies held by her deceased husband. The defendant-appellant Life Insurance Corporation denied the claim on the plea that the deceased, while filling up the proposal forms for the policies, was guilty of fraudulent misrepresentations and suppression of material facts with regard to his health. The trial court accepted the defence and dismissed the suit. On appeal by the plaintiff, the High Court reversed the decision and passed a decree.2. The deceased husband of the plaintiff was described in the policies as T.R. Gurupadaiah but in the plaint his name has been mentioned as Gurupadappa. However, since in our view the correct spelling of the name is not material for purposes of the present case, it is not necessary to give further details in regard to the difference in the two names. We a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-01-1990
Dole v. United Steelworkers - 494 U.S. 26 (1990) U.S. Supreme Court Dole v. United Steelworkers, 494 U.S. 26 (1990) Dole v. United Steelworkers of America No. 88-1434 Argued Nov. 6, 1989 Decided Feb. 21, 1990 494 U.S. 26 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Syllabus Pursuant to the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, petitioner Department of Labor (DOL) promulgated a Hazard Communications Standard, which imposed disclosure requirements on manufacturers aimed at ensuring that their employees were informed of the potential hazards posed by chemicals in the workplace. Among other things, the Standard required the manufacturers to label hazardous chemical containers, conduct training on the chemicals' dangers, and make available to employees safety data sheets on the chemicals. Respondents and others challenged the Standard in the Court of Appeals. The court held that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) had not adeq...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : May-16-1990
Reported in : 1999(I)OLR46
P.C. Misra, J.1. Appellants in this appeal were plaintiffs in a suit (O.S. No. 126/75-1) in the Court of Munsif, Bhadrak. The suit was dismissed on merits by judgment dated 12.12.1977 passed by the learned trial Court against which they preferred Title Appeal No. 2/78 in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Bhadrak. The said appeal was posted to 3.4.1980 for hearing on which day the Advocate appearing for the appellants filed an application praying for an adjournment on the ground of illness of their Advocate of Cuttack, who had been engaged to argue the appeal. The appeal was adjourned to 7.5.1980 on which day the appellants also applied for adjournment on the very same stand. The court reluctantly allowed adjournment on payment of cost of Rs. 100/- and the appeal was posted to 9.5.1980 for hearing. On that day also adjournment was applied on the ground of continuous illness of Advocate of Cuttack. The learned lower Appellate Court did not allow any further adjournment and dismissed the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-22-1990
Reported in : 1990(2)ARBLR395(Delhi); 42(1990)DLT329
Leila Seth, J.(1) A preliminary objection has been raised that the appeal is not maintainable in view of Section 39 of the Arbitration Act. (2) The Impugned order dated 5th June, 1986 was passed by the learned 'Single Judge on an application filed under section 41(b) read with the Second Schedule of the Arbitration Act and Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The appellant filed this appeal as also a Special Leave petition against the impugned order. We are informed that the Special Leave petition is still pending in the Supreme Court. (3) 'MS. Anand, learned counsel for the respondents has relied on the decision of this Court in Mls Banwari Lal Radhey Mohan.The Punjab State Co-operative Supply and Marketing Federation Ltd., : AIR1983Delhi402 in support of the preliminary objection. (4) Mr. Koura, learned counsel for the appellants has vehemently urged that the appeal is maintainable under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act and Section 39(1) of the Arbitration Act...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Nov-15-1990
Reported in : [1991]81STC313(Ker)
K. Sukumaran, J.1. Dealers in diverse goods have come to the Constitutional Court seeking the striking down of Section 59A in the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. The goods in which they deal range from bread, bun and horlicks to volatile oil, cosmetics and shampoos and imitation jewellery. Even odd goods like tarpaulin, power line carriers, communication equipments, nylon fish nets, copper sulphate, microscope, battery plates and the like are arrayed in the list. Many cases have been disposed of without a pronouncement on the crucial question of constitutional validity, they could be so disposed of : for, the court, on an examination of relevant facts and factors, found that the governmental declaration under the impugned section was in tune with the correct legal position. Such decisions cover Importex International (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1991] 81 STC 351 infra ; (1990) 2 KLT 487 and Rajan v. State of Kerala [1991] 81 STC 330 infra ; (1990) 2 KLT 511 ; in some others, the de...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jun-25-1990
Cruzan v. Director, MDH - 497 U.S. 261 (1990) U.S. Supreme Court Cruzan v. Director, MDH, 497 U.S. 261 (1990) Cruzan by Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health No. 88-1503 Argued Dec. 6, 1989 Decided June 25, 1990 497 U.S. 261 CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI Syllabus Petitioner Nancy Cruzan is incompetent, having sustained severe injuries in an automobile accident, and now lies in a Missouri state hospital in what is referred to as a persistent vegetative state: generally, a condition in which a person exhibits motor reflexes but evinces no indications of significant cognitive function. The State is bearing the cost of her care. Hospital employees refused, without court approval, to honor the request of Cruzan's parents, copetitioners here, to terminate her artificial nutrition and hydration, since that would result in death. A state trial court authorized the termination, finding that a person in Cruzan's condition has a fundamental right under the Sta...
Tag this Judgment!