|
| Bombay high court order to stop probe quashed |
| BS Reporter / New Delhi Aug 17, 2009, 00:35 IST |
|
The Supreme Court has set aside the order of the Bombay high court quashing the investigation against the chairman and managing director of City Limouzines Ltd on a complaint by an investor in the company. The proceedings will thus go on. According to the plan floated by the company, each investor deposited about Rs 1 lakh in a ren-a-car scheme. The car would be purchased in the name of the investor but the vehicle would be used by the company which will pay Rs 4,000 per month to the investor for five years. After 60 months, the agreement would end and the investor is free to take back his car in proper working condition. The dispute arose when an investor was given cheques instead of the car. He filed a complaint with the police, which was quashed by the high court. The government appealed to the Supreme Court (State of Maharashtra vs Sayed Masood) which asked the investigating officer to carry out his inquiry.
Seasonal staff of sugar firms have no right for work next season
The Supreme Court set aside the judgement of the Allahabad high court in the case, UP State Sugar Corporation Ltd vs Niraj Kumar, and ruled that seasonal employees of sugar factories have no right to get work in the following season. The employees argued that since they had worked in one crushing season, they had a right to get work in the following season also. The high court agreed with their view. However, on appeal by the sugar corporation, the Supreme Court denied such right to the workers.
Food adulteration case drags on too long
The Supreme Court has quashed a complaint of food adulteration since it had lasted 28 years. The sample of curd was taken from a hotel in 1988 and the food analyst’s report was given 15 months later. The hotelier argued before the Gujarat high court that the sample had by then deteriorated and the report could not be relied upon. The high court rejected his argument and allowed the criminal proceedings to go on in Girishbai Shah vs C C Jani. On appeal, the Supreme Court quashed the proceedings observing that “we see no reason to continue with the proceedings which have lasted for 28 years in the absence of any valid and reliable report with regard to the sample.”
Carpenter’s dependants get their due
The Supreme Court has dismissed the appeal of National Insurance Company against the Madhya Pradesh high court asking it to pay Rs 4.48 lakh to the dependants of a carpenter who died in a road accident when a truck hit a jeep in which he was riding. The tribunal had awarded Rs 2.32 lakh, which was enhanced by the high court. The insurance company argued in appeal that the amount was exorbitant as a carpenter could not have been earning Rs 100 a day as the high court estimated. The Supreme Court rejected the contention and asserted that even in 1997 when the mishap occurred, “he could have comfortably earned Rs 100 a day.”
Can saw mills, staying closed for three months, open
The Supreme Court has asked the Uttar Pradesh government to decide within three months whether the saw mills which are lying closed following its orders could be allowed to open and start manufacturing if wood is available. It may be recalled that the court had ordered the closure of saw mills in forest areas a decade ago. In this case, T N Godavarman vs Union of India, several saw mills of the state submitted that they were suffering huge losses as the units were not functioning at present though they were in existence for long. They claimed that wood was available for them. The court therefore asked the government to find out whether they can be “accommodated” in future if wood was available.
Case of Karishma’s lost dress
The Maharashtra State Consumer Commission has rejected the demand of NN Sippy Productions for Rs 15 lakh compensation from Air France for losing in transit the costumes of actor Karishma Kapoor meant for shooting in Zurich. The programme had to be cancelled because of the loss and the team returned to India. However, the consumer commission did not find any deficiency in service on the part of the airline. The bag was booked in the name of a production assistant travelling in economy class and there was no special arrangement as alleged by the firm. Therefore, the airline offered only Rs 22,640 following the standard set by Warsaw Convention of 1929 and Haque Protocol Convention of 1955. The commission stated that special liability for valuable contents of the lost baggage would arise only in case of proper declaration. No such declaration was made in this case though the bag carried the words, “Karishma Kapoor Big Size”.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Read Business news in |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Content Guide
