Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-11-1993
Reported in : 1993(3)ALT1(SC); 1993(2)ARBLR95(SC); JT1993(3)SC394; (1993)105PLR200; 1993(2)SCALE798; (1993)3SCC1; [1993]3SCR640
R.M. Sahai, J.1. The short and the only question of law that arises for consideration in this appeal is if an appeal was maintainable against an order passed by the Learned Single Judge under Section 39(1) of the Arbitration Act either under Section 39(2) of the Act or under the Letters Patent jurisdiction.2. Facts are not in dispute. Since the State did not appoint any Arbitrator as provided for in Clause 25 of the agreement despite letters by the respondent to the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department (P.W.D.) and the Secretary P.W.D. the respondent approached the High Court and a Learned Single Judge by order dated 6th September, 1991 revoked the authority of the Chief Engineer to act as an arbitrator and directed one Shri O.K. Roy Chowdhury to act as the sole arbitrator as suggested by the respondent. Against this order the State filed an appeal which has been dismissed by the Division Bench upholding the objection of the respondent as not maintainable. It has been held that the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-02-1993
Reported in : [1994]210ITR409(Bom)
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question to this court for its opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee-company was not mainly engaged in the manufacture of goods and as such it was not an industrial company as defined in the Finance Act, 1974 ?' 2. Section 2(8) (c) of the Finance Act, 1974, defines the expression 'industrial company' for the purposes of the said Act as under : c) 'industrial company' means a company which is mainly engaged in the business of generation or distribution of electricity or any other form of power or in the construction of ships or in the manufacture or processing of goods or in mining; planation. - For the purposes of this clause, a company shall be deemed to be mainly engaged in the business of generation or distribution of electricity or any other form of power or in the const...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Aug-05-1993
Reported in : [1994]210ITR299(Ker)
John Mathew, J.1. Whether the assessee's hospital is existing solely for philanthropic purposes and not for purposes of profit is the important question of law involved in this reference. The assessee (Pulikkal Medical Foundation) is a private company as defined under the Companies Act, 1956. The liability of its members is limited. It was incorporated on June 23, 1976. It is running a hospital at Cochin known as 'Medical Trust Hospital'. The company became a deemed public company under Section 43A(1A) with effect from January 1, 1986. The word 'private' in the name of the company was cancelled from that date. A fresh certificate of incorporation consequent on the change of name was given on May 12, 1988. The Medical Trust Hospital was originally run by a firm of partners. That firm was dissolved on October 15, 1976, and its business was taken over by the assessee-company giving the partners of the firm due credit.2. For the assessment year 1981-82, the assessee had a net profit of Rs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-21-1993
Reported in : AIR1994Bom80; 1994(3)BomCR139; (1993)95BOMLR302
1. This is an appeal preferred by original Respondents to challenge Order dated January 27th 1993 passed by the Learned Single Judge in Arbitration Petition No. 45 of 1993. By the impugned order, the Learned Single Judge made the petition absolute and pending arbitration, restrained the Appellants herein from encashing or receiving any amount under the Bank Guarantees mentioned in Exhibit 'F' thereto. The facts which gave rise to the filing of the said Petition are as follows :--In or about the year 1987, the Appellants had floated a tender notice inviting tenders in respect of construction of an underground tunnel which was part of the Bombay III Water Supply Project. Along with their letter dated 16th May J9S8, the Respondents had submitted their tender for construction of underground tunnel between Dr. E. Moses Road and Ruparel College, Bombay, a part of the said project which was accepted by the Appellants and a contract bearing No. 2769-IN/1750-IN/W/20 (for short 'the said Contrac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Aug-13-1993
Reported in : II(1993)ACC663; 1994ACJ157; AIR1994Raj44; 1993(2)WLC593
1. This is a special appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 30th October, 1986.2. On 24th June, 1974, Rao Dheer Singh was going from Manoharpura to Shahpura in his car No. RJL 8207. The fuel exhausted abruptly, as a result the car was stopped by its driver. He went to Shahpura to bring the petrol. Rao Dheer Singh, its owner, remained sitting in the car. At about 1.00 A.M. truck No. RJR 6607 driven by Tara Chand rashly and negligently dashed against the standing car resulting in instantaneous death of Rao Dheer Singh.3. On the above bedrock of facts, a claim petition was filed by his widow, two sons and daughters under the Motor Vehicles Act claiming Rs. 6 lacs against the owner of the truck No. RJR 6607 and the Oriental Insurance Company with which the car was insured.4. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur made an Award in favour of the claimants and also found that the Oriental Insurance Company...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jul-26-1993
Reported in : (1994)1MLJ78
Somasundaram, J.1. This Letters Patent appeal has been filed against the Order dated 8.4.1993 made in Contempt Application No. 507 of 1992 filed by the first respondent herein, directing respondents 2 to 4 herein to permit the first respondent herein to quarry sand in Amaravathi river for a period of 3 1/2 months from 1.5.1993.2. In the Sub Application No. 133 of 1992 in Contempt Application No. 507 of 1992, the appellant along with 5 others was sought to be impleaded as respondents 4 to 9 in Contempt Application No. 507 of 1992. However, Sub-Application 133 of 1992 was not pressed by the first respondent herein in the course of the proceedings in Contempt Application No. 507 of 1992 and the parties proposed to be impleaded as respondents 4 to 9 were given up. The appellant got leave of this Court to file this L.P.A. in C.M.P. No. 8488 of 1993.3. Brief facts leading to the filing of this appeal are the following: The first respondent herein was granted lease of lands in the Amaravathi ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jun-08-1993
Reported in : ILR1993KAR1910; 1992(2)KarLJ388
ORDERVasanthakumar, J.1. Petitioner in this Writ Petition has sought the following reliefs.-a) Writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing Annexure-H, dated 20.5.1992 in No. KV VIM (Samyojane) 91-92 700 issued by the first respondent herein.b) Direct the respondents to consider on merits the application made by the petitioner Sangha for the affiliation of its BEd college for the academic year 1991-92 in accordance with the provisions of Section 53 of the Act and issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant affiliation/renewal/continuation of affiliation for the academic year 1992-93. During the pendency of this Writ Petition the petitioner has filed additional statement of facts and has sought for quashing of the order dated 19.6.1992 on the following lines (I.A.No. 1 was allowed on 26.8.1992).c) Writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned order at Annexure-J dated 19.6.1992 in No. ED 108 UGC 91 passed by the Second respondent herein in the interest of justice.F...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Decided on : Mar-30-1993
S.B. Sinha, J.1. In this application the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to allow him to sit in the 1990 Supplementary Examination to be held from 4th July, 1992.2. The fact of the matter lies in a very narrow compass.3. The petitioner appeared at the All India Entrance Test conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education in terms of the direction of the Supreme Court of India for filling 15% seats in M.B.B.S. Course in all the Medical Colleges situated within the territory of India.4. The petitioner was at the first instance admitted in B. D. S. course in Government Dental College, Bombay. The petitioner was thereafter selected for MBBS course as some seats remained vacant and by reason of a memorandum dated 5th June, 1991 as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ application he was directed to take admission at the Medical College in Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Bhagalpur. He was admitted in the said institution on 18-7-1991. He allegedly attended ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Decided on : Dec-07-1993
S.B. Sinha, J. 1. The vires of Rule 3B of the Bihar Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules 1930 is in question in these writ applications. 2. The petitioner No. 1 of CWJC No. 9981 of 1992 is a registered association of transporters looking after their Welfare and the petitioner Nos. 2 and 5 have been carrying on their transport business. 3. The legislature of Bihar enacted BiharMotor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1930, (here-inafter called and referred to as 'the said Act'),in terms whereof road tax as envisaged under Section 6 thereof upon the transport operationshad been levied. 4. In the year 1993 the State of Bihar byreason of the provisions of Bihar Finance Act,1983 imposed additional tax upon the PublicService Motor Vehicles by inserting Section 6(1A)therein. 5. The State of Bihar in exercise of its power conferred upon it under Section 14 of the said Act framed rules known as 'Bihar Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules 1930'. In the year1966 Rule 3B was inserted in the said rules; in terms whereof...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Sep-22-1993
Reported in : AIR1994SC205; JT1993(5)SC391; 1993(3)SCALE834; 1994Supp(1)SCC160
ORDERS.C. Agrawal, J.1. These cases raise common questions involving challenge to the validity of the notification dated November 3, 1988 issued by the Government of India, whereby the earlier notification dated July 23, 1983 was amended and item No. 14 of the drugs specified in the Table in the said notification was substituted so as to prohibit completely the manufacture and sale of fixed dose combination of steroids with other drugs for internal use. The said notification has been issued in exercise of the power conferred by Section 26-A of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). In the said notification, it has been stated that the Central Government is now satisfied that long term use of steroids in fixed dose combinations for treatment of asthma is likely to involve risk to human beings and such formulations do not have therapeutic justification and further that it is necessary and expedient in public interest to prohibit the manufacture and sale o...
Tag this Judgment!