Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: pepsu court of wards act 2008 bk Year: 2013 Page 1 of about 79 results (0.057 seconds)

Oct 19 2013 (HC)

Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. and Another Vs ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-19-2013

..... the domain of the arbitral tribunal. thirdly, it was submitted that the award of damages could not be challenged under section 34 of the said act as held by the supreme court in mcdermott vs. burn standard (2006 (11) scc 181). the learned senior counsel invited our attention to paras 102, 106, 110 and ..... in respect whereof there was no dispute or difference; or (vi) whether the award is vitiated by internal contradictions. ? thirdly, the apex court in delhi development authority vs. r.s. sharma and co. (2008) 13 scc 80), has observed in paragraph 21 as under:- ??21. from the above decisions, the following principles emerge: (a) an ..... ongc vs. saw pipes (2003) 5 scc 705)(paras 1, 13, 15, 22, 31, 72, 74) (2) delhi development authority vs. r.s. sharma and co. (2008) 13 scc 80)(paras 20, 21) (3) steel authority of india limited vs. gupta brother steel tubes ltd. (2009) 10 scc 63)(paras 17, 18) (4) j.g ..... senior counsel for the parties. this appeal by special leave was filed against order dated 22nd of october, 2008 of the high court of judicature at bombay in appeal no.672 of 2005 whereby the high court had allowed the appeal of the respondent herein and set aside the order dated 3rd august, 2005 passed ..... hence relying upon the case of delhi development authority vs. m/s. r.s. sharma and co. new delhi 2008 11 scale 663 @ 672in paragraph 12 he contended that under section 34 of the act, the award was liable to be set aside. he contended that such an award was contrary to the substantive .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 24 2013 (SC)

Balram Prasad Vs. Kunal Saha and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-24-2013

..... cannot be assessed in a personal injury case with any pretence of accuracy until the condition of the plaintiff has stabilised, and b) subject to the provisions of the supreme court act 1981, s.32a when that section is brought into force, when damages are assessed they are assessed once for all in relation to both actual past and anticipated future loss ..... of the claimant that the national commission has completely failed to award just compensation due to non consideration of all the following critical factors:1. the guidelines provided by supreme court: this court has provided guidelines as to how the national commission should arrive at an adequate compensation after consideration of the unique nature of the case.2) status and qualification of ..... paid to the claimant, within eight weeks and submit the compliance report. j.[chandramauli kr. prasad]. j.[v. gopala gowda]. new delhi, october 24, 2013.-.---------------------- [1]. (2009) 9 scc221[2]. (2008) 4 scc162[3]. (2002) 6 scc281[4]. [5]. (2009) 6 scc1[6]. (2009) 14 scc1[7]. (2001) 8 scc197[8]. (2001) 8 scc151[9]. (2011) 14 scc481[10]. (2011)12 ..... . usha rajkhowa v. paramount industries, |rs.5,000 | |(2009) 14 scc71| | |15. laxmi devi v. mohammad. tabbar, (2008) 12 |rs.5,000 | |scc165| | |16. andhra pradesh state road transport |rs.5,000 | |corporation v. m. ramadevi, (2008) 3 scc379| | |17. state of punjab v. jalour singh, (2008) 2 |rs.5,000 | |scc660| | |18. abati bezbaruah v. dy. director general, |rs.3,000 | |geological .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 30 2013 (FN)

Blq Vs. Blr

Court : Singapore Supreme Court

Decided on : Dec-30-2013

..... is seven days. the husband in sum 30400/2013 prayed for extension of time "to apply for leave under section 34 of the supreme court of judicature act". is section 34 of the supreme court of judicature act (cap 322, 2007 rev ed) ("scja") applicable in this case? section 34 states: matters that are non-appealable or appealable only ..... prescribed period for filing the application for leave to appeal is seven days. it reads: a party applying for leave under section 34 of the supreme court of judicature act to appeal against an order made, or a judgment given, by a judge must file his application to the judge within 7 days from the date of ..... or abridge the period within which a person is required or authorised by these rules or by any judgment, order or direction, to do any act in any proceedings. (2) the court may extend any such period as is referred to in paragraph (1) although the application for extension is not made until after the expiration of ..... chien wen edwin [1991] 2 slr(r) 260 at [15], ad v ae [2004] 2 slr(r) 505 at [10], [lee hsien loong v singapore democratic party [2008] 1 slr(r) 757] at [18] and anwar siraj v ting kang chung john [2010] 1 slr 1026 at [29]). it should, however, be noted that these factors ..... an application for leave to file an appeal out of time (see, eg, the oriental insurance co ltd v reliance national asia re pte ltd [2008] 3 slr(r) 121, which pertained to the late filing of a proof of debt under a scheme of arrangement for a company). [emphasis added] the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 30 2013 (HC)

Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited Vs. Green Gardens Private Limited

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-30-2013

..... sun tv network were being sold by the creditor and he informed her of the development. she filed a suit c.s.no.1172 of 2008 in the high court of madras. in cross examination the residential addresses of indira anand and k.bharathi were brought out. he was asked about the telephone of anand ..... creditor. he informed k.bharathi of the sale of the pledged shares of indira anand. she thereupon filed the suit c.s.no.1177 of 2008 in the high court of madras.51. in the claim by indira anand, he deposed that he was asked to look after some of the personal financial matters of ..... valuation causing huge losses to the debtors and the pledgors. thereafter, more shares were sold on subsequent dates. by ignoring the interim direction of this court, on 19.12.2008, the creditor sold the balance share at rs.145 per share, whereas the market value of sun tv network shares for that day was rs ..... dw1, subsisting at that stage supported by the two pledges-) the scope of the orders passed by the high court of madras before proceeding with the sale of shares on 19.12.2008, the creditor had acted, if not recklessly atleast with lack of care. it cannot be forgotten that the creditor was the bailee of ..... the sale of shares effected on 02.12.2008, 15.12.2008, 16.12.2008 and 19.12.2008 was in contravention of the provisions of the indian contract act. whereas the sale on 19.12.2008 was malafide and was a deliberate flouting of the order of injunction passed by this court. the sale was also not bonafide being .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 25 2013 (HC)

Ratheesh K.R. Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-25-2013

..... and filling up of wet land in wp(c).no.19564/11 & con.cases 20 violation of the kerala conservation of paddy land and wet land act, 2008 and the kerala land utilization order, 1967. a writ of prohibition is sought against respondents 5 and 8 (the state electricity board and its executive engineer ..... a case that there is reclamation by the company without permit under the land utilisation order, 1967 and the kerala conservation of paddy land and wet land act, 2008. further more, it is contended that an under water electric line was laid at a cost of `1.5 crores, which is illegal. there is ..... to be noticed that crz-iv under the 2011 notification, is the water area from the low tide line to 12 nautical miles on the sea ward side and also the water area of the tidal influenced water body from the mouth wp(c).no.19564/11 & con.cases 27 of the water ..... without any clearance from the ministry of environment and forests as per 1991 and 2011 notifications. it is not permitted. the nediyathuruthu island has crz land ward of htl upto 100 metres. the water body is classified as crz-iv. reference is made to conditions in annexure ii of 1991 notification and annexure ..... .48. in karnataka state financial corporation v. n. narasimahaiah and others ((2008) 5 scc 176), the court held that the power under section 29 of the state financial corporation act, 1951 could be exercised only against defaulting concern and not against the surety. the court held, inter alia, as follows: "40. right to property, although .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 2013 (HC)

Rds Project Ltd Vs. Ratangiri Gas and Power Pvt Ltd and ors

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-18-2013

..... even bid for the project. g) the contention of the petitioner is that the power of attorney executed in favour of p.surya rao was never acted upon as testified by mr.n.karthikeyan, genereal manager of ehl in his affidavit dated 15.01.2013 for the reason that the defects in power ..... of rgppl to examine the eligibility of the bider and observed as under : .suffice it to say for the present that rgppl as the owner acting as a prudent and responsible public authority discharging public trust obligations was well within its rights to raise questions and seek answers on an important matter like ..... having its registered office at tower house, 1st floor, aberdeen bazar, port blai 101. and m/s. rds project limited, a company incorporated under the indian companies act, 1956 (1 of 1956) and having its registered office at 427, somdutt chambers-ii, 9, bhikaji cama place, new delhi-110 066, india and branch office ..... of breakwater from the length 102 mtrs. to 200 mtrs i.e. 98 mtrs. learned asg has taken us through the documents obtained by rgppl under rti act as well as the cag report to indicate the extent of work attributed to rds as well as to emphasize that construction of breakwater at mus in ..... bind them or that the same was contrary to the facts. the high court ought to have examined the issue on merits, rather than taking a short cut. the high court has incidentally taken support from the certificate dated 5th april, 2008 and clarification issued on 5th june, 2010 to hold that the rds had .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 12 2013 (HC)

Deputy General Manager of Indian Bank Vs. Presiding Officer of Central ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-12-2013

..... ) in support of his contentions.5. we have perused the punishment order dated 8.7.2004 passed by the appellant bank; award of the central industrial tribunal-cum-labour court dated 25.6.2008; order of the learned single judge dated 13.3.2012; decisions cited by both sides; and connected records.6. the charges levelled against the second respondent/writ petitioner ..... in w.p.no.5387 of 2001 dated 27.8.2009.15. the issue of exercise of discretion under section 11a of the industrial disputes act, 1947, by the labour court came up before the hon'ble supreme court in the decision reported in air 200.sc 252.(divisional manager, rajasthan s.r.t.c. v. kamruddin) wherein it is held that though ..... there was bona fide loss of confidence in the employee, observing that, (i) the workman is holding the position of trust and confidence; (ii) by abusing such position, he commits act which results in forfeiting the same; and (iii) to continue him in service/establishment would be embarrassing and inconvenient to the employer, or would be detrimental to the discipline or ..... appellate authority on 18.8.2004, which was also rejected on 15.2.2005. (g) thereafter the second respondent raised an industrial dispute under section 2a of the industrial disputes act, 1947, before the assistant labour commissioner (central) chennai, and a failure report as to the conciliation was issued and thereafter the ministry of labour, government of india on 6.2 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 27 2013 (HC)

Ponnammal Vs. M.Harikrishnan

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-27-2013

..... and another vs. state of uttar pradesh and others].. certain excerpts from it would run thus: ".37. section 165 of the evidence act, 1872 empowers the court to ask questions relevant, irrelevant, related or unrelated to the case to the party to ascertain the true facts. the party may not ..... or is addressed to a person other than a person entitled to the right. interpreting section 19 of the limitation act, 1908 (corresponding to section 18 of the limitation act, 1963) this court in shapur fredoom mazda v. durga prosad chamaria (air1961sc1236, held : .............". acknowledgement as prescribed by section 19 ..... have preferred this second appeal on various grounds and also suggesting the following substantial questions of law: a) is the lower appellate court correct and justified in disposing of the appeal even framing proper point and arise for consideration and even without following the procedure laid ..... the judgment and decree dated 09.07.2009 passed by the learned district munsif cum judicial magistrate, sriperumbudur in o.s.no.524 of 2008. for appellants : mr.m.ramamoorthy for mr.m.d.thirunavukkarasu for respondent : mr.m.venkatachalapathy senior counsel for mr.y.jyothish chander ..... district munsif cum judicial magistrate, sriperumbudur in o.s.no.524 of 2008.2. the parties, for the sake of convenience, are referred to here under according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial court.3. compendiously and concisely, the relevant facts, which stood uncurtained and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 2013 (SC)

State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-28-2013

..... agreement dated 06.10.1975 is the structure and not the spread area.54. in orient papers and industries ltd.1, this court was concerned with provisions of orissa irrigation act, 1959, particularly, sections 4(d) and 28 thereof. while dealing with the argument that the irrigation work as defined under ..... by the two states amicably, the central water commission (cwc) intervened. in the meanwhile, a public interest litigation was also filed before this court. one of the prayers therein is for issuance of directions against maharashtra to stop the construction of babhali barrage and direction to the central government ..... maharashtra.63. as regards lift irrigation schemes, maharashtra has averred in paragraph 12(ii) of the amended written statement filed on 30.01.2008 as under:below vishnupuri barrage on the main godavari river and the state border with andhra pradesh there is a vast area and population of ..... all the efforts made by andhra pradesh in stopping construction of babhali barrage by maharashtra failed and despite pendency of a writ petition before this court in the nature of public interest litigation, maharashtra continued with construction of babhali barrage.10. maharashtra has traversed the claim of andhra pradesh. ..... of documents were filed by them. on 05.08.2008, the court recorded that counsel on either side had agreed that there would not be any oral evidence in the suit. as both sides had filed series of documents, the court on that day observed that the parties may file a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 23 2013 (SC)

Prashant Bharti. Vs. State of Nct of Delhi.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-23-2013

..... of divorce, from her previous husband. she accordingly produced a certified copy of the judgment and decree of the court of the civil judge (senior division), kanpur (rural) dated 23.9.2008. a photocopy thereof duly attested by priya, the complainant/prosecuterix, and her counsel, were taken on record. a ..... in the statement of minakshi pw23, pointed out by the learned counsel for the accused-appellant, as also, the reasoning rendered by the high court in the impugned judgment becomes insignificant. we are satisfied, that the process by which the accused-appellant came to be identified during the course ..... porwal on 14.6.2003. it also reveals, that the aforesaid marriage subsisted till 23.9.2008, when the two divorced one another by mutual consent under section 13b of the hindu marriage act. in her supplementary statement dated 21.2.2007, the complainant/prosecuterix accused prashant bhati of ..... , 1955, on 23.9.2008. priya, the complainant/prosecuterix also affirmed, that she had remarried thereafter. she also produced before us a certificate of marriage dated ..... perusal of the same reveals, that the complainant/prosecuterix was married to lalji porwal on 14.6.2003. she was divorced from her said husband by mutual consent under section 13b of the hindu marriage act .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //