Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the appropriation railways act 2014 Court: kolkata Page 2 of about 1,917 results (0.146 seconds)

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Ram Chandra Tanti and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : 2004(3)CHN11,(2005)ILLJ162Cal

..... das lastly referred to the contract labour (regulation and abolition) act, 1970, and the authority contained therein empowering the appropriate government to prohibit employment of contract labour in any process, operation or other work in any establishment, but did not pursue his argument to establish whether the original applicants were, in fact, contract labourers who were required to take recourse to the provisions of the said act, in this regard mr. ..... (d) the respondent authorities having control over the concerned railway stations shall thereafter absorb the petitioners as regular railway parcel porters of the those stations only, the number to be so absorbed being limited to the quantum of work which may become available to them on a perennial basis after creation of appropriate number of posts and after following prescribed procedures. ..... after noting the case made out by the added respondents that they are licensed porters and pay licence fee to the railways as per the terms and conditions of their licence they were entitled to handle both passengers' luggage as also parcels and luggage in the custody of the railways and after recording the stand of the railways that even the original applicants were licensed porters, the learned tribunal came to the conclusion that the original applicants were all, in fact, parcel porters and not passengers' porters. .....

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Pawandas (Pawan Kumar) Pvt. Ltd. and Five ors ...

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (2003)3CALLT342(HC)

..... . assuming that the application made before this court was premature it was open to the railways to appoint arbitrator at the appropriate stage ..... . under section 16 of the said act, 1996 the issue of jurisdiction was to be raised at the appropriate time being any time before or at the time of filing of the counter statement of facts ..... . joyanta mitra, learned counsel appearing for the claimants, submitted that since the arbitrator was appointed by this court under section 11 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the parties the railways were not entitled to raise the issue of jurisdiction and that too at the 54th sitting. mr ..... . in paragraph 15 of the said judgment the apex court was of the view that under the indian law inspite of there being a contract between the parties whereunder the contractor has undertaken not to make any claim for delay in performance of the contract occasioned by an act of the employer, still a claim would be entertained in one of the following situations:--(i) if the contractor repudiates the contract exercising his right to do so under section 55 of the contract act ..... . mitra on the other hand submitted that under the provision of section 4 the railways had waived their right granted under the said act. mr ..... . mitra the rights, if any, on these score, had been waived by the railways in terms of section 4 of the said act, 1996.17. mr .....

R. S. Fuel Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Ors.

Court : Kolkata

..... relying on a railway board rakes circular no.86/06 (for short circular no.86/06).sr.banerjee argues that the railways- respondents are competent to carry out a second weighment upon instructions from the appropriate authority or the vigilance department, as the case may be. ld. ..... sr.agarwala submits that the railways is not a party to the arbitration reference and the petitioners have only claimed for return of the charges deposited with the railways on the ground that the railways lack the jurisdiction to impose the charges under the 1989 act. ..... it is also noticed by this court that after the demand was paid by the writ petitioner without raising any protest challenging the legal validity of such demand which the writ petitioners could do under the law and soon after ecl raised the supplementary bill based on the reweighment carried out by the railways and the arbitral reference commenced on 10th june, 2014, the writ petitioners filed the present writ petition on 26th june, 2014. ..... counsel for the petitioners points out that such position has been clarified under sections 73 and 78 of the railways act, 1989 (for short the 1989 act).sr.agarwala submits that since the railways threatened not to allot rakes in future to the petitioner no1-company the writ petitioner had no option but to pay the illegal demand in the interests of conducting their business. .....

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Ratan Lall Adukia and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1987Cal311,(1987)1CALLT354(HC),92CWN166

..... an implied repeal was not intended provisions of section 72 of the travancore cochin motor vehicles act represented the latest will of the legislature and will have overriding effect on the earlier provision in the sense that despite the fact that some action had been taken by municipal council by resorting to the earlier provision, the appropriate authority may nevertheless take action under section 72of the travancore cochin motor vehicles act, the result of which would be to override the action taken by the municipal council under section 287 ..... of animals or goods may be instituted, (a) if the passenger was, or the animals or goods were, booked from one station to another on the railway of the same railway administration, against that railway administration; (b) if the passenger was, or the animals or the goods were, booked through over the railway of two or more railway administrations against the railway administration from which the passenger obtained his pass or purchased his ticket or to which the animals or goods, were delivered for carriage, as the case may be, or against the railway administration on whose railway the destination station lies, or the loss, injury, destruction, damage .....

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Ad-hoc Claims Commissioner and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1977Cal393,(1977)1CompLJ456(Cal),81CWN649

..... the railway administration was dissatisfied with the determination of such compensation which according to the railway was not authorised by the provisions of the indian railways act, 1890 and the rules made thereunder. ..... it may be that in determining compensation, the claims commissioner will have to take into consideration all circumstances including pain and suffering from respective injury, but unless there is a personal injury no compensation is payable under section 82-a of the railways act and the railway accidents (compensation) rules, 1950 as amended. ..... the liability of railway administration in respect of accidents to trains carrying passengers is provided in sections 82a to 82j of the indian railways act, 1890, section 82-a provides in sub-section (1) that the railway administration shall be liable to pay compensation for death and for personal injury and loss of accompanying goods owned by the passenger sustained as a result of such accident. ..... there is no dispute that in appropriate case, the courts have interpreted the word 'any' as 'all' but where the provisions are clear and free from ambiguity it is not permissible to read in statute what is not there. ..... accordingly the union of india moved this court by applications under article 227 of the constitution against the several orders for compensation and the rules before us were issued on those applications for appropriate orders and directions. .....

Sahari Rajwarni Vs. Chief Executive Officer, Corpn. of Calcutta

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1955Cal307,(1954)ILLJ633Cal

..... disputed that the deceased person was employed directly ..... chatterjee has contended that the deceased must be taken to have been employed upon a railway as defined in sub-section (4) of section 3 and sub-section (1) of section 148, railways act, 1890, inasmuch as he was employed on the railway platform; secondly, that he was also employed by a person fulfilling a contract with the railway administration, inasmuch as the corporation must have a contract with the railway for the carriage of the refuse; and thirdly that he was also employed directly by a person fulfilling a contract with the railway administration, because it was not ..... even been a 'prima facie' case that the widow might succeed on the basis of clause (12), we might have considered whether we would not direct a remand of the case on appropriate terms, but having considered the language of the clause more closely, we have come to the conclusion that no useful purpose will be served by remanding the case. .....

Narang Rai Agarwalla Vs. River Steam Navigation Company, Ld.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (1907)ILR34Cal419

..... in the first place, if the railway company can be taken to be the agents of the steamer company and the contract be held to be indivisible, i am of opinion that the river company is entitled to claim protection from liability to the plaintiff on the ground that he had himself failed to comply with the provisions of the carriers' act or of the railways act, and had wilfully concealed from them information which would have enabled them to comply with the provisions of the railways act, when using the railway company for the transmission of the goods from goalundo to calcutta.9. ..... it is also clear beyond doubt that the charges for transmission of the goods were made according to the rates laid down by the river company for the journey by river and the railway company for the journey by land, and that the money was received to be so appropriated between the two companies. ..... the contract was for the carriage of goods partly by river and partly by land, and so far as the two portions of the journey are concerned, i hold that the contract is divisible, and that so far as the journey was by river the steamer company is entitled to claim as regards the acts of its agents and servants the protection afforded by the provisions of the carriers' act, and so far as the journey was by rail it is similarly entitled to claim the protection afforded by the railways act. .....

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Straw Products Ltd.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1984Cal291

..... the union of india representing the south eastern railway administration by filing a written statement contested the suit inter alia on the ground that the same was not maintainable, the suit was barred under section 78-b of the indian railways act, the suit as framed was not maintainable, and the plaintiff was not entitled to the benefit of the concessional freight rates until and unless the railway administration had extended to the plaintiff the benefits of the said ..... the learned subordinate judge, as already stated, has decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff inter alia holding that the suit was maintainable, it was not barred by limitation, the provisions of section 78-b of the indian railways act had been complied with and the plaintiff had been discriminated by the defendant by refusing the benefits of the concessional freight rates.4. ..... barred by limitation or that no notice under section 78-b of the railways act had been served within six months. mr. ..... v of the indian railways act does not provide for redress for the remedies sought for in the instant suit. ..... it may be noted that at one stage of the correspondence among the officers of the railway administration themselves the chief commercial superintendent, south eastern railway, himself had suggested that the plaintiff ought to be granted retrospectively the benefits of the concessional rates which were being enjoyed by all other ..... the said rates tribunal in an appropriate case might make an order with prospective .....

Union of India (Uoi) (as Representing the Eastern Railway Administrati ...

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1958Cal434

..... jogpat singh : air1924cal725 , this court held that the word, 'loss' in section 72 of the indian railways act does not mean pecuniary or other loss suffered by the owner of the goods through being wrongly deprived of the possession, use or enjoyment thereof, but means loss of the goods while in transit and such loss occurs whenever the railway company, to which the goods have been consigned for conveyance, involuntarily or through inadvertence loses possession of the goods and for the time being is unable to trace them. ..... the position in law, in my opinion, is that if the non-deli-very of a portion of the consignment in this case was due to the fact that the railway involuntarily or through inadvertence lost possession of the goods and was unable to trace them, it would be a case of joss within the meaning of section 77 of the indian railways act.10. ..... it was urged that the notice under section 77 of the indian railways act having been served more than six months after the date of booking, the notice that wag served purporting to be under section 77 was invalid in jaw and so the provisions of section 77 stood in the way of the plaintiff getting any relief as regards the first consignment.4. ..... mukherji contends there was, that this was a case of conversion by the railway, there can be no doubt that article 48 would be the appropriate article of limitation. .....

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Gujrat Tobacco Co. and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1955Cal448,59CWN278

..... it has, at least, all the commonsense of the matter from a practical point of view and as the purpose of the statutory notice is sufficiently and unquestionably served by service upon the chief commercial manager, he being the authority who actually deals with claims against the railway and as this statutory notice under section 77 of the indian railways act 'is not' as distinguished from the other statutory notice under section 80, civil p. c. ..... over again that, under article 30, limitation act, the onus to prove the date of 'loss or injury', mentioned in the third column of that article, is, where the goods are carried by rail and the loss or injury occurs in the course of such transit, on the railway concerned, and, in the absence of satisfactory evidence on its part on this point, that is, in the event of its failure to discharge the onus, the date of delivery to the party should be taken as the relevant date of 'loss or injury', or, in other words, as the starting point of limitation under article 30.this ..... a contrary opinion has no doubt been expressed in the recent decision of this court in the case of : air1951cal512 , enjoining strict compliance with the statute in the matter of such service and recognising the general manager alone as the appropriate authority to be served with notice under section 77. .....