IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA BEFORE. THE HON BLE Dr.JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM
|
|
- Berenice Booth
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA DATED THIS THE 9 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2013 BEFORE THE HON BLE Dr.JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM MFA No.6785/2008(WC) CONNECTED WITH MFA No.6786/2008(WC) MFA No.6787/2008(WC) IN MFA No.6785/2008 BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. DIVISIONAL OFFICE V.V.SUKHANI COMPLEX, I FLOOR GANDHI CHOWK, RAICHUR APPELLANT (BY SRI SUDARSHAN.M, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UCHUNGAPPA S/O DURGAPPA AGED: 45 YEARS OCC: EX. HAMALI R/O KALLI LINGASUGUR LINGASGUR TALUK RAICHUR DISTRICT 2. A. NAGARAJA S/O A. HALAPPA OCC: OWNER OF TRACTOR
2 2 No.KA R/O HEGGADAL VILLAGE KUDLIGI TALUK 3. P. GOVINDA NAIKA S/O P. DHARMA NAIKA OCC: OWNER OF TRAILER No.KA-35-T-4564 R/O HAGARI BOMMANAHALLI TALUK BELLARY DISTRICT... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MAHADEV S. PATIL FOR R2 & R3) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED IN WCA/CR-671/2006 PASSED BY THE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION. IN MFA No.6786/2008 BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. DIVISIONAL OFFICE V.V.SUKHANI COMPLEX, I FLOOR GANDHI CHOWK, RAICHUR APPELLANT (BY SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. G. SOMANNA S/O SHIVALINGAPPA AGED 68 YEARS OCC: EX. HAMALI R/O KALLI LINGASUGUR LINGASUGUR TALUK RAICHUR DISTRICT
3 3 2. A.NAGARAJA S/O A. HALAPPA OCC: OWNER OF TRACTOR No.KA R/O HEGGADAL VILLAGE KUDLIGI TALUK 3. P.GOVINDA NAIKA S/O P. DHARMA NAIKA OCC: OWNER OF TRAILER No.KA-35-T4564 R/O HAGARI BOMMANAHALLI TALUK BELLARY DISTRICT... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MAHADEV S. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3, R1-NOTICE H/S V/O DT ) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED IN WCA/CR-672/2006 PASSED BY THE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION, RAICHUR. IN MFA No.6787/2008 BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. DIVISIONAL OFFICE V.V.SUKHANI COMPLEX, I FLOOR GANDHI CHOWK, RAICHUR APPELLANT (BY SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CHAKERI DURGAPPA S/O GANGAMMA AGED 35 YEARS OCC: EX. HAMALI R/O KALLI LINGASUGUR
4 4 LINGASUGUR TALUK RAICHUR DISTRICT 2. A.NAGARAJA S/O A. HALAPPA OCC: OWNER OF TRACTOR No.KA R/O HEGGADAL VILLAGE KUDLIGI TALUK 3. P.GOVINDA NAIKA S/O P.DHARMA NAIKA OCC: OWNER OF TRAILER No.KA-35-T-4564 R/O HAGARI BOMMANMAHALLI TALUK BELLARY DISTRICT... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MAHADEV S. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 30(1) OF WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED IN WCA/CR-673/2006 PASSED BY THE LABOUR OFFICER AND COMMISSIONER FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION, RAICHUR. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:- JUDGMENT These three appeals are by the insurance company against the award in favour of claimants questioning the liability as also the quantum.
5 5 2. Heard Sri Sudarshan M., learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondents/claimants and perused the records in supplementation thereto. 3. The genesis of these appeals is the motor vehicle accident on involving tractor and trailer bearing registration Nos.KA and KA-35-T-4564 in which persons carried in the trailer suffered injuries and laid claim placing actionable and culpable negligence in driving of the tractor owned by the first respondent in the claim petition. Owner of the trailer was brought into party array as respondent No.2 and insurer as respondent No The claimants assertively contended they were employed by the owner of the trailer to work as loader and during the course of such employment they were made to carry tamarind the agricultural produce to a defined destination, enroute the tractor driver drove it rashly and negligently resulting in accident in which they suffered injuries. Thus, they sought compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss through their claims filed under the
6 6 provisions of Workmen's Compensation Act before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation. 5. In the enquiry that ensued, the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation keeping in mind the defence of the insurance company that persons who lodged claims were not the employees of the owner of the tractor, analyzed the evidence but rejected such defences. Secondly, the insurance company assertively resisted the claims on the ground the policy is miscellaneous agricultural policy provided to cover only risk as defined under the policy in relation to agricultural work and no other. However, the learned Commissioner has opined the evidence establishes firstly culpable negligence of the driver of the trailer and secondly that claimants were coolies/loaders employed by the owner of the trailer. Therefore, he quantified the compensation depending on each victims injuries and the pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss suffered and passed the award.
7 7 6. All the three awards are assailed by the insurance company in these appeals filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act. Firstly, it must be noticed the appeal under Section 30 is permissible only when substantial question of law is raised for an answer and not on facts. Be that as it may, appeals were admitted and taken up for final disposal. 7. Learned counsel referred to the policy of the insurance issued by the appellant which undoubtedly show the premium collected by the insurance company is more than the basic premium prescribed for the tractor as well as trailer. In the circumstances, I had directed insurance company to furnish the details as to cover which risk the insurance company had collected extra amount more than the basic premium. This was necessitated as the policy contained no material information as to the risk covered except showing high premium collected. 8. In response to such direction, learned counsel has filed a memo showing braking up all the amount
8 8 collected and has also produced the supplementary policy showing what was collected. The appellant has collected Rs.1,397/- also and supplementary policy shows it is in addition to what the premium was collected earlier. There is again no details mentioned regarding collection of Rs.1,397/-. On the face of it, the policy is a contractual policy falling under sub-section (5) of Section 147 of the motor vehicles Act and not a case falling under sub section (1) of Section 147 granting only statutory insurance cover. The policy issued is a package policy in view of such high premium collected. 9. The second ground urged by the learned counsel is, on facts, claims were untenable as the claimants were carried as passengers by contravention of the permit granted by the RTO. Since the insurance company had described them as passengers necessarily we have to look for the evidence on record from which no material has been salvaged by the insurance company to support the defence. Each of the claimants has categorically deposed
9 9 that he or she was the coolie carried in a trailer for the loading and unloading of Tamarind. That assertive statement of claimants has remained undisturbed despite all the defence of insurance company. There is no independent evidence apart from what is referred to above. The ocular testimony of the claimants has established claimants were carried in the trailer for loading and unloading. Thus statutorily covered under Section 147 of the Act. This takes us to the next question raised by the insurance company i.e., even presuming they were loaders, miscellaneous agricultural policy does not cover the risk of such loaders. 10. Learned counsel placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of DIVISIONAL MANAGER v. AKKAVVA reported in LAWS(KAR) equivalent to ILR(KAR) , wherein learned single Judge of this Court opined that miscellaneous agricultural policy does not cover the risk of employees who were employed as loaders or coolies in the trailer or
10 10 tractor. Basis for such opinion is found in paragraph 5, wherein it is observed: 5. It is not in dispute that the policy in question which has been marked as Ex.R1 in the evidence of R.W.1 is a farmer s package insurance policy. It is also not in dispute that the said Ex.R1 does not cover the risk of any coolie as such and it only covers the risk of the insured himself and his vehicle, i.e., the tractor cum trailer as well as the risk in respect of building of Class-A constructions and the contents excluding jewellery and valuables. Therefore, having regard to the nature of the policy taken out by the insured and the said policy being the standard policy forming the basis of contract between the insured and the insurance company, the question for consideration will be whether the said policy covers the risk of the two claimants herein who were found travelling with several other persons in the trailer in question on the date of the accident. 11. In paragraph 6, the learned Judge has referred to the fact that insurance company had not collected any
11 11 additional premium. Therefore, on facts also that decision will not apply as in this case insurance company has collected a very heavy premium as referred to supra. 12. However, the final opinion expressed by the learned Judge is in paragraphs 9 and 12, wherein it has observed thus: 9. Concerning the submission of the learned senior counsel that the evidence of RW1 should not be looked into because it is in violation of Order 18 Rule 4 of the CPC, I do not find any merit in the said ground urged because not only RW1 has been examined before the mact, but even the claimants have given their evidence by way of affidavit so far as examination-in-chief is concerned. It is, therefore, not possible to ignore the evidence of RW1, but accepted the evidence of the claimants though they also give evidence by way of affidavit. The learned senior counsel also referred to the evidence of RW1 in regard to which the Tribunal has observed in paragraph No.12 of its order that since Ex.R1 is the farmer s package insurance and the
12 12 same being comprehensive policy, the coolies travelling in the tractor-trailer are covered under the said insurance policy. Having carefully examined the evidence of RW1, I do not find any such statement being made by RW1 in the course of his evidence and therefore, the said observation of the Tribunal is wholly incorrect. 12. In this connection, it is pertinent to refer to the decision of this Court in the case of UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY limited vs. HANUMANTHAPPA AND OTHERS. In the said decision, it has been held that there is no statutory liability on the part of the insurer to cover the risk of all types of employees of the insured owning a motor vehicle, but only such of those employees within the meaning of workmen under the W.C. Act will have to be covered compulsorily. Therefore, the employees who are employed in connection with the motor vehicle as defined under Section 2 (n) will have the benefit of statutory coverage and the court also further held that on fact as the deceased and insured were not the employees employed in connection with
13 13 the motor vehicle, but employed for agricultural work, the award against the insurer is bad in law. While laying down the above law, this court also placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY limited vs. V. CHINNAMMA AND OTHERS (SUPRA). ILR 2006 Karnataka Yet another decision referred to by the learned counsel for the claimants concerning Section 39 of the M.V. Act has no application to the case on hand for the reasons already stated, as we are concerned with a motor vehicle which is insured under the farmer s package policy and meant for agricultural purposes only, the use of the said tractor-cumtrailer to carry number of persons who are going for coolie work therefore, is contrary to the very purpose for which the policy was issued. Thus, to conclude, the policy in question that is Ex.R1 is a policy in the nature of farmer s package policy insurance, covering the risk of only those persons mentioned in the policy and the said vehicle was used in
14 14 contravention of Section 66 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 13. It is evident from the decision on facts in that case it is held that employees like loaders and coolies are held not covered statutorily. Reference is made to section 2(n) of the Workmen's Compensation Act. Firstly, the definition of workman in Section 2(n) of the Workmen's Compensation Act as it was in the book of statute has since been omitted by amendment to the Workmen's Compensation Act by Act 45 of 2009 which has came in effect on However, for clarity, it is necessary to refer to Section 2(n), which reads thus: The workman is defined in Section 2(n) of the Workmen's Compensation Act as a person recruited as driver, helper, mechanic cleaner or in any other capacity in connection with a motor vehicle. 14. However, it is necessary to notice, even Section 2(n) by virtue of amendment Act 30 of 1996 with effect from (a) was introduced whereby person
15 15 recruited as driver, helper, mechanic, cleaner or in any other capacity in connection with the motor cycle are covered. After repeal of Section 2(n) of the Act, Section 2 (1)(dd) is inserted. Section 2(i)(c). A person recruited as driver, helper, mechanic, clearer or in any other capacity in connection with the motor vehicle. 15. This undoubtedly includes all or any other employees of the insured who are employed in connection with motor vehicle and works under his direction, carried in the vehicle to do a work in relation to vehicle in question. In the instant case, claimants claim they were coolies employed to load and unload agriculture produce in the trailer and therefore, it has to be held such persons were employed in connection with the vehicle insured. Once we held them as such, Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act is attracted. Section 147 of M.V. Act provides statutory cover to certain category of persons and as
16 16 defined under Section 147(i) of M.V. Act. The proviso reads thus: 147. Requirements of Policies and limits of liability: 1).. Provided that a policy shall not be required (i) to cover liability in respect of the death, arising out of and in the course of his employment, of the employee of a person insured by the policy or in respect of bodily injury sustained by such an employee arising out of and in the course of his employment other than a liability arising under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923) in respect of death of, or bodily injury to, any such employee (a) (b) (c) engaged in driving the vehicle, or if it is a public service vehicle engaged as conductor of the vehicle or in examining tickets on the vehicle, or if it is a goods carriage, being carried in the vehicle,
17 The category of persons referred to is employee as defined in the Workmen's Compensation Act. Now definition of workman having been removed from the book of statute, the provisions of Section 2(dd) defines employee. He is automatically covered under the provisions of the Employee s Compensation Act, 1923 which is Workmen's Compensation Act amended in 2009 and the insurer is bound to cover the risk even if it has collected only basic premium. This is statutory coverage provided under Section 147 and therefore, even if we hold that the policy is only the act policy, it binds the insurer to indemnify the insured. Besides, as insurer has collected extra premium, the policy has transformed into contractual policy covered by sub-section 5 of Section 147 of the Motor Vehicles Act, which reads thus. 147(5). Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, an insurer issuing a policy of insurance under this section shall be liable to indemnify the person or classes of persons specified in
18 18 the policy in respect of any liability which the policy purports to cover in the case of that person in the case of that person or those classes of persons. 17. The insurance company has issued cover to indemnify the person insured i.e., owner of the trailer against all his legal liability. As the claim is against the owner, in view of Section 5 having collected extra premium, insurance company is bound to indemnify him. 18. In this view, there is no merit in the appeals and each. NB* the appeals are dismissed with the cost of Rs.5,000/- Sd/- JUDGE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G. RAMESH. M.F.A.No.937 / 2011 (MV)
BETWEEN: 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 11/21 st DAY OF MARCH 2014 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G. RAMESH 1. RENU S/O.GOPAL AGED 50 YEARS, 2. SMT MENAKA W/O. RENU
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.PATIL AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 7 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2013 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.PATIL AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR MFA.NO.7995/2011(MV) BETWEEN MFA.NO.7995/2011
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSATION MATTER Reserved on: 21st February, 2012 Pronounced on: 2nd July, 2012 MAC.APP.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSATION MATTER Reserved on: 21st February, 2012 Pronounced on: 2nd July, 2012 MAC.APP. 10/2008 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.... Appellant Through: Mr.Pradeep
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, GULBARGA BENCH BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, GULBARGA BENCH DATED THIS THE 10 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2014 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.12587/2007 (MV) C/w MISCELLANEOUS
More informationWhether employer /establishment can reduce the basic wages/salary for the purpose of deduction of provident
$% $ % $! # $ $ % % %# &%!# ' %& $$ $%%&% # % 0 #8 $!#$# &# %! $!# ' %&$! "" ##$% & $ " $'$ "" (#$#( & $ " $$%'#$(()# & $ """ %) " ) *! +!,-!. Recently, the Hon ble Supreme Court has pronounced land-mark
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA GULBARGA BENCH BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH M.F.A. NO.30794/2013 (MV)
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA GULBARGA BENCH ON THE 4 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2014 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH M.F.A. NO.30794/2013 (MV) BETWEEN THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BILGUNDI
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA NO.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 17 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR BETWEEN: ITA NO.223/2009 Shri.R.S.Sharma,
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Page No.1 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Mfa 40 OF 2010 M/S NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No.4398 OF 2016 VERSUS J U D G M E N T
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4398 OF 2016 Anil Kumar.Appellant(s) VERSUS Branch Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr. Respondent(s) J
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MEGHALAYA: MANIPUR: TRIPURA: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) MAC Appeal No.
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MEGHALAYA: MANIPUR: TRIPURA: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) MAC Appeal No.121/2007 Sri Padam Bahadur Rana S/o Late TB Rana, Resident of Vill
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR CEA.NO.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 2 ND DAY OF APRIL 2014 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR CEA.NO.13/2013 BETWEEN: The Commissioner
More informationCIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2018 [Arising out of SLP(C) No of 2017] SHAMANNA AND ANOTHER...Appellants. Versus
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8144 OF 2018 [Arising out of SLP(C) No.26955 of 2017] SHAMANNA AND ANOTHER...Appellants Versus THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24 TH DAY OF MARCH 2016 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24 TH DAY OF MARCH 2016 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8463/2011 (MV) c/w MISCELLANEOUS FIRST
More informationREPORTED * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
REPORTED * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC.APP. No. 385/2008 RAJASTHAN ROADWAYS TRANSPORT CORPORATION... Appellant Through: Ms. Ritu Bhardwaj, Advocate. versus SMT. MUKESH AND ORS. Through:...
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.H.G.RAMESH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8 TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.H.G.RAMESH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR BETWEEN : I.A.No.4/2017
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR C.S.T.A. NO.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2015 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR BETWEEN C.S.T.A. NO.4/2015 THE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA. ITA. No.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BETWEEN: DATED THIS THE 1 st DAY OF APRIL 2016 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA ITA. No.653/2015 C/W
More informationIN THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH C. Vinay Mishra. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. IT Appeal No. 895 (Bang.) of s.p. no. 124 (Bang.
IN THE ITAT BANGALORE BENCH C Vinay Mishra v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax IT Appeal No. 895 (Bang.) of 2012 s.p. no. 124 (Bang.) of 2012 [ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10] OCTOBER 12, 2012 ORDER Jason
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA ITA NO.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2015 BETWEEN: PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA ITA NO.22/2011 1. COMMISSIONER
More informationNingamma & Anr vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd on 13 May, 2009
Supreme Court of India Ningamma & Anr vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd on 13 May, 2009 Author:. M Sharma Bench: S.B. Sinha, Mukundakam Sharma REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA. ITA No.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17 TH DAY OF MARCH 2016 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA BETWEEN: ITA No.660/2015 1. THE
More information/TRUE COPY/ PS TO JUDGE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JULY 2015/12TH ASHADHA, 1937 ITA.No. 278 of
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).9310/2017 (Arising from Special Leave Petition(s)No.
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).9310/2017 (Arising from Special Leave Petition(s)No.24702/2015) FIRDAUS Petitioner(s) VERSUS ORIENTAL INSURANCE
More information- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA. M.F.A.No.1156 /2011 (MV)
- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15 TH DAY OF JUNE 2015 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA BETWEEN: AND: M.F.A.No.1156 /2011 (MV) 1. SMT.ELCY D SOUZA W/O LATE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE. DATED THIS THE 4 th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP B BHOSALE
1 BETWEEN IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 4 th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP B BHOSALE AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B MANOHAR ITA.NO.480/2013 M/S.
More informationTHE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) MACApp. 51 of 2011
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) MACApp. 51 of 2011 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. SHYAM RAI MAHANTA AND ORS. -Versus-..Appellant...Respondents BEFORE
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No.2015 OF 2007 VERSUS J U D G M E N T
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2015 OF 2007 Commissioner of Income Tax Cochin.Appellant(s) VERSUS M/s Travancore Cochin Udyoga Mandal Respondent(s)
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA ITA NO.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016 BETWEEN: PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA ITA NO. 303/2015 1. Principle
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21 ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR BETWEEN: ITA NOS.251/2016 & 390/2016
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL. R.S.A.No.941/2010
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 30 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2013 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL R.S.A.No.941/2010 BETWEEN I.C.VISHWAKUMAR S/O I.R.CHANDRASHEKARAIAH ADVOCATE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL. W.P.No.4857/2013 (SC/ST)
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 3 RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2014 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL W.P.No.4857/2013 (SC/ST) BETWEEN SHRI R VAMSIDHAR S/O SHIR RAMACHANDRA NAIDU
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL Judgment delivered on: 13th February, 2014 MAC.APPEAL NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL Judgment delivered on: 13th February, 2014 MAC.APPEAL NO. 1020/2012 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Represented by: Manu Shahalia,
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No. 7 OF 2019 [Arising out of SLP (C) No of 2014] Versus
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No. 7 OF 2019 [Arising out of SLP (C) No. 17975 of 2014] Management of the Barara Cooperative Marketing cum Processing
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B MANOHAR
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 07 TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B MANOHAR ITA No.766 OF 2009 c/w ITA Nos.769/2009,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 9 TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA WRIT APPEAL NO.4077 OF 2013 (T-IT) BETWEEN
More informationREPORTED * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC APP. NO.109/2009
REPORTED * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC APP. NO.109/2009 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.... Appellant Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Advocate. versus KUNTI DEVI AND ORS.. Through:... Respondents
More informationDATED: 9th January, 2009
(-1-) MGN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1398 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income ) Tax-3 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. ) Road, Mumbai-400 020.
More information- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA M.F.A.NO.1538/2011(ESI)
- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 28 TH DAY OF MARCH 2013 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA BETWEEN M.F.A.NO.1538/2011(ESI) 1. EMPLOYEES, STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU R DATED THIS THE 18 TH DAY OF MARCH 2015 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA WRIT APPEAL NOS. 989-1009/2015 (T-RES)
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSATION MATTER MAC. APP. 30/2006. Judgment reserved on: 14th November,2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSATION MATTER MAC. APP. 30/2006 Judgment reserved on: 14th November,2007 Judgment delivered on: 28th March, 2008 Jeet Singh... Through: Appellant
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) MAC App 201/2011
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) MAC App 201/2011 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. A company registered and incorporated under the Companies
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD : PRESENT : THE HON BLE MR. VIKRAMAJIT SEN, CHIEF JUSTICE
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 27 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2012 : PRESENT : THE HON BLE MR. VIKRAMAJIT SEN, CHIEF JUSTICE BETWEEN AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER. ITA No-160/2005. Judgment reserved on: 12th March, 2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER ITA No-160/2005 Judgment reserved on: 12th March, 2007 Judgment delivered on: 24th May, 2007 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-I, NEW DELHI...
More informationRespondent preferred an appeal there against before the Commissioner (Appeals), which by an order dated was allowed. Appellant preferred an
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Civil Appeal No. 5901 of 2006 Decided On: 03.03.2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida Vs. Accurate Meters Ltd. Hon'ble Judges: S.B. Sinha, Asok Kumar Ganguly and R.M.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH PRESENT. THE HON' BLE Dr. JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM AND THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 20 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013 PRESENT THE HON' BLE Dr. JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIM AND THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA BETWEEN: WRIT APPEAL
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BETWEEN: DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA No.1081/2006 1. THE
More informationGroup 4 Securitas Guarding Ltd. vs The Regional Provident Fund... on 30 October, 2003
Karnataka High Court Karnataka High Court Equivalent citations: 2004 (102) FLR 374, ILR 2004 KAR 2067 Author: V Shetty Bench: P V Shetty, A J Gunjal JUDGMENT Vishwanatha Shetty, J. 1. The appellant in
More informationARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW. ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 199 of Thursday, this the 30 th day of August, 2018
1 RESERVED COURT No.1 ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 199 of 2018 Thursday, this the 30 th day of August, 2018 Hon ble Mr. Justice SVS Rathore, Member (J) Hon ble
More informationW.P.No.39548/2012 (T-IT)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3 RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR W.P.No.39548/2012 (T-IT) BETWEEN : M/s
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE Dated this the 6 th day of August, 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA BETWEEN: STRP No.356 of 2012 & STRP Nos.544-620
More informationOriental Insurance Co.Ltd vs Inderjit Kaur & Ors on 8 December, 1997
Supreme Court of India Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd vs Inderjit Kaur & Ors on 8 December, 1997 Author: Bharucha Bench: Cji, S.P. Bharucha, S.C. Sen PETITIONER: ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. Vs. RESPONDENT: INDERJIT
More informationSUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 8
http://judis.nic.in SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 8 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 5462 of 2002 PETITIONER: Bangalore Development Authority RESPONDENT: Syndicate Bank DATE OF JUDGMENT: 17/05/2007 BENCH: P.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE Dated this the 20 th day of June, 2012 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE D V SHYLENDRA KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE B MANOHAR Between: Sales Tax Revision
More information$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Advocate. Versus
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 1990/2010 PREM KUMAR Judgment delivered on:08 th February, 2016 Represented by: Advocate. Versus... Petitioner Mr. Yogesh Verma, CUSTOMS... Respondent
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22 nd DAY OF APRIL 2015 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA WRIT APPEAL NO.4900/2011 & WRIT APPEAL
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT AND. STA No.97/2013
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3 RD DAY OF JUNE, 2015 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAN M.SHANTANAGOUDAR AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR STA No.97/2013 BETWEEN:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA ITA NO.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016 BETWEEN: PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE S SUJATHA ITA NO.205 OF 2015 1.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA NO.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 05 TH DAY OF MARCH 2014 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR BETWEEN: ITA NO.828/2007 H.Raghavendra
More informationIn the High Court of Judicature at Madras. Date : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. Sudhakar and The Honble Ms. Justice K.B.K.
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Date : 14.07.2015 The Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. Sudhakar and The Honble Ms. Justice K.B.K. Vasuki T.C.A. No: 398 of 2007 M/s. Anusha Investments Ltd. 8 Haddows Road
More informationCHHATTISGARH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PANDRI, RAIPUR (C.G.)
CHHATTISGARH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PANDRI, RAIPUR (C.G.) Appeal No.FA/12/551 Instituted on : 04.10.2012 National Insurance Company Limited, Through : Divisional Manager, Divisional
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSAION MATTER Date of decision:20th July, 2012 MAC.APP. 375/2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSAION MATTER Date of decision:20th July, 2012 MAC.APP. 375/2012 SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD... Appellant Through Mr. K.L. Nandwani, Advocate
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHE A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHE A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s Malpani Estates, S.No.150, Malpani House, Indira Gandhi Marg,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B MANOHAR. ITA No.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 27 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B MANOHAR BETWEEN: ITA No. 351/2011 1. Commissioner
More information[2016] 68 taxmann.com 41 (Mumbai - CESTAT) CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH. Commissioner of Service Tax. Vs. Lionbridge Technologies (P.) Ltd.
[2016] 68 taxmann.com 41 (Mumbai - CESTAT) CESTAT, MUMBAI BENCH Commissioner of Service Tax Vs. Lionbridge Technologies (P.) Ltd.* M.V. RAVINDRAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ORDER NO. A/85873/16/SMB AND OTHERS FEBRUARY
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT. Case No: MFA 36/2008
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) Case No: 1. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. Having its Registered & Head Office at GE Plaza, Airport
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: INCOME TAX MATTER. Judgment delivered on : ITR Nos. 159 to 161 /1988
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: INCOME TAX MATTER Judgment delivered on : 09.07.2008 ITR Nos. 159 to 161 /1988 M/S DELHI INTER EXPORTS PVT LTD... Appellant versus THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO(S) /2018 (Special Leave Petition (C) No(s).
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 1799-1800/2018 (Special Leave Petition (C) No(s). 30733-30734/2013) RAMJI SINGH PATEL APPELLANT(s) VERSUS GYAN
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Reportable CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1928 OF 2019 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil)No.24690 of 2018) SANJAY SINGH AND ANR.. Appellants VERSUS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO.76 OF 1998
Chittewan 1/11 1.ITR76-98.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO.76 OF 1998 Bombay Suburban Electric Supply Ltd.... Applicant Versus
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL Date of decision: 9th January, 2013 MAC APP.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL Date of decision: 9th January, 2013 MAC APP. 703/2010 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.... Appellant Through: Mr. D.D. Singh
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE PRESENT. THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE AND. STRP Nos OF 2013*
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 17 TH DAY OF JULY, 2014 PRESENT THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE B. MANOHAR STRP Nos.774-794 OF 2013* BETWEEN: M/S
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT R A N C H I ---- Tax Appeal No. 04 of I.T.O., Ward NO.1, Ranchi. Appellant. Versus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT R A N C H I ---- Tax Appeal No. 04 of 1999 ---- I.T.O., Ward NO.1, Ranchi. Appellant. Versus Shri Jay Poddar Respondent. ---- CORAM : HON BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON BLE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATER. Judgment delivered on: ITA 243/2008. versus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATER Judgment delivered on: 26.11.2008 ITA 243/2008 SUBODH KUMAR BHARGAVA... Appellant versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX... Respondent Advocates
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SREEDHAR RAO BETWEEN : AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR CRP No.332/2010 STATE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU. Present THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE VINEET SARAN THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE B MANOHAR O S A 1 / 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU Dated this the 26 th day of August, 2015 Present THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE VINEET SARAN & THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE B MANOHAR O S A 1 / 2015 Between M/s Shah Polymers
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL Date of decision: 29th November, 2012 MAC.APP.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL Date of decision: 29th November, 2012 MAC.APP. 244/2010 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.... Appellant Through: Mr. Vivek
More informationIN THE INCME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, C BENCH, KOLKATA. Before : Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member, and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member
IN THE INCME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, C BENCH, KOLKATA Before : Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member, and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A No. 1185/Kol/2012 A.Y. 2008-09 I.T.O Ward 1(1),
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU. DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF AUGUST, 2015 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU R DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF AUGUST, 2015 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN AND THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR BETWEEN: ITA Nos.65/2014 C/W
More informationINDIRECT TAXES Central Excise and Customs Case Law Update
CA. Hasmukh Kamdar INDIRECT TAXES Central Excise and Customs Case Law Update Valuation Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai vs. Fiat India Pvt. Ltd. [2012 (283) ELT 161 (S.C.) decided on 29-8-12] Facts
More informationA FORTNIGHTLY VAT/GST LAW REPORTER 2003 NTN 22)-7 [ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT]
2003 (Vol. 22)-7 [ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] Hon'ble Shyamal Kumar Sen, C.J. & Hon'ble R.K. Agrawal, J. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1338 OF 1991 M/s Mukund Lal Banarasi Lal vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 12 th DAY OF JUNE 2014 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR STRP 120/2013 & STRPs.229-250/2013 c/w STRP
More informationHIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT Commissioner of Income-tax-I v. Aditya Medisales Ltd. M.R. SHAH AND MS. SONIA GOKANI, JJ. TAX APPEAL NO. 730 OF 2013 SEPTEMBER 2, 2013 JUDGMENT Ms. Sonia Gokani, J. - The Tax Appeal
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD. TAX APPEAL NO. 93 of 2000
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 93 of 2000 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER ================================================================
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Reserved On: Decided On: Versus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.253/2007 % Reserved On: 18.11.2010 Decided On:23.11.2010 M/S GODREJ HI CARE LTD.. Appellant Through: Mr.Rajiv Tyagi and Mr.Ram Manohar Singh, Advocates
More informationCORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 747 of 2013 ================================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V...Appellant(s) Versus POLESTAR INDUSTRIES...Opponent(s)
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI C.L.SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.E. VEERABHADRAPPA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI C.L.SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER. I.T. A. No.4931/Del/2010 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Quippo
More informationIncome Tax Appeal No. 6 of M/s. Shiv Shakti Flour Mills (P) Ltd., Makum Road, Tinsukia Versus-
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram & Arunachal Pradesh) Income Tax Appeal No. 6 of 2014 M/s. Shiv Shakti Flour Mills (P) Ltd., Makum Road, Tinsukia 786125. -Versus- Commissioner
More information2011 NTN 46)-10 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]
2011 NTN (Vol. 46)-10 [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, & Anil R. Dave, JJ. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3186 OF 2011 [Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 560 of 2011] Commissioner
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 14 TH DAY OF JULY, 2014 PRESENT HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA NO 47 OF 2014 c/w. ITA NO.46/2014, ITA NO.494/2013
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/s. Ujagar Holdings Pvt. Ltd., 8-D,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income-tax) (Original Side) I.T.A. No.219 of 2003
1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income-tax) (Original Side) Present: The Hon ble Mr. Justice Bhaskar Bhattacharya And The Hon ble Mr. Justice Sambuddha Chakrabarti I.T.A. No.219 of
More informationAt the time of Sec. 80G approval object of trust needs to be examined without considering application of income
At the time of Sec. 80G approval object of trust needs to be examined without considering application of income Citation: Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajkot-III v. Vipassana Trust Court: HIGH COURT OF
More informationIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE. BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.726/Bang/2014 (Assessment year: 2005-06) M/s.B & B Infotech
More information01 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI.... Respondent Mr. A.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate.
01 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO(OS) 39/2009 Date of Decision : 23 rd July, 2009 SAMRAT PRESS UOI versus Through : Through :... Appellant Mr. Shiv Khorana, Advocate.... Respondent Mr.
More informationPRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1 ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017 PRESENT THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE A N VENUGOPALA GOWDA ITA NO.191/2015 C/W ITA
More informationIN ITA.NO.819/2007: BETWEEN: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, C R BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 17 TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B. MANOHAR I.T.A. NO.819/2007 C/W ITA.NO.9/2009
More informationCHAPTER 214 THE MOTOR VEHICLE INSURANCE (THIRD PARTY RISKS) ACT. Arrangement of Sections.
CHAPTER 214 THE MOTOR VEHICLE INSURANCE (THIRD PARTY RISKS) ACT. Section 1. Interpretation. Arrangement of Sections. PART I INTERPRETATION. PART II COMPULSORY INSURANCE OF VEHICLES. 2. Vehicles to be insured
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. LPA No.101/2010 and LPA No.461/2010 & CM Appl. Nos /2010. Date of Hearing:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION ACT LPA No.101/2010 and LPA No.461/2010 & CM Appl. Nos.11988-11989/2010 Date of Hearing: 27.02.2012 Date of Decision: 07.03.2012 1) LPA
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT W.P.(C) 1254/2010 DATE OF DECISION :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT W.P.(C) 1254/2010 DATE OF DECISION : 04.02.2011 ST.LAWRENCE EDUCATIONAL SOCIEITY (REGD.)& ANOTHER... Petitioner Through Mr. V.P. Gupta and
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSATION MATTER Date of decision: 6th August, 2012 FAO 23/2000
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSATION MATTER Date of decision: 6th August, 2012 FAO 23/2000 N.K.MUDGAL... Appellant Through: Mr. Lakhmi Chand, Adv. versus JAI PRAKASH & ORS...
More information