Whether the tribunal can achieve what the SC did is a moot question

Passing on the green baton

Business Standard

The Supreme Court last week ruled that Tata Communications, the successor of VSNL, was providing commercial service for profit considerations and it is not performing public functions

Tatacom managers lose appeals

The Supreme Court last week held that the Madhya Pradesh government cannot demand entertainment tax on DTH  services provided to customers of Tata Sky under the state Entertainment Duty and Advertisements Tax Act. The revenue department had demanded 20 per cent entertainment duty on subscription payment from the telecasters. They had moved the high court, but it had dismissed all of them, upholding the demand of the revenue authorities. Allowing the appeal of the company in the case, Tata Sky vs State of MP, the judgment stated that the Act cannot be extended to cover DTH operations. The state law imposes duty only if an entertainment takes place  in a specified place or location and persons are  admitted  there  on payment of a charge to the proprietor providing the entertainment.   In  the case of DTH,  the operation is not a place-related entertainment. Therefore, the law is not applicable to DTH.RTI query on CESTAT dismissedThe Supreme Court last week dismissed an appeal seeking in

DTH free from entertainment tax

Government-owned companies want the best of both worlds

Twin avatars of PSUs

The Supreme Court has set aside the judgment of the Calcutta high court and ruled in favour of the contract labourers working for the Kolkata Port Trust. The port authorities have given a project of laying rail lines to government-owned RITES. The central government had issued a notification under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act in 2005 prohibiting employment of contract labour in the works of railway tracks in the port trust. The contract labourers, who were working for two decades without permanent status, wanted abolition of the contract labour system. While they moved the high court, the port trust also approached the high court to quash the notification. The high court held that the notification would not affect the work handed over to RITES. The workers appealed to the Supreme Court in the case, Baleshwar Rajabanshi vs Board of Trustees. The Supreme Court, while overruling the high court, remarked that the high court judgment was written in a "highly casual and

Port Trust labourers win case

The Supreme Court sets guidelines to rein in get-rich-quick schemes

Investing in naÃ¯vety

The Supreme Court has dismissed the appeal of Escorts Ltd, ruling that the arbitration award made in the US against it was final and binding. Universal Tractor Holding LLC and Escorts Agri Machinery Inc, a subsidiary of Escorts Ltd, were holding shares in Beever Creek Holdings. There was an agreement by which Universal sold its shareholding in Beever to Escorts Agri. The latter defaulted in payment leading to a suit in North Carolina. It was later referred to arbitration, which went against Escorts Agri. Escorts companies had merged, and the Indian company objected to the execution of the award in India.The Delhi High Court rejected the objection, against which the firm moved the Supreme Court. It rejected that argument of Escorts that Universal ought to have proceeded for confirmation of the award under the US law and then come to India for execution. The judgment pointed out that the requirement of "double exequatur", as pleaded, has been dispensed with in the New York Convention and

Escorts arbitration appeal dismissed

Even transitional provisions in plant varieties and farmers' rights law have not been enforced in 12 years

Another tribunal gone to seed

The Supreme Court today asked Sterlite Industries to pay compensation of Rs 100 crore for polluting environment through its copper smelting plant in Tamil Nadu

For green reasons, pay Rs 100 cr compensation: SC to Sterlite

Shattered by the Supreme Court verdict on Glivec patent, Novartis India said that SC decision discourages innovative drug discovery essential to advancing medical science for patients.

SC verdict to discourage drug discovery in India: Novartis

The Supreme Court has ordered retrial of a suit which started in 1988 in the matter of purchase of five diesel vehicles from Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co Ltd. The apex court said the Bombay High Court applied wrong legal principles and, therefore, the purchaser, Shantilal Gulabchand Mutha, should be allowed to present his case. The Supreme Court also said Mutha was not given a hearing and his application was rejected by the high court without giving adequate reasons. Mutha had given eight bills of exchange through Mercantile Bank Ltd for purchase of the vehicles but the company disputed the interest element and moved the suit. Mutha did not file statement under the impression that the amounts due had been paid. For that reason, ex parte decree was passed against him. He moved appeals but the high court exercised its discretionary power under the Civil Procedure Code and rejected those on the ground that he had failed to file his statement. In the final appeal, the Supreme Court

SC revives 25-year-old suit

Impleading top corporate executives is subject to strict conditions

When courts haul up honchos

The Supreme Court last week held that if a party to an arbitration agreement failed to appoint an arbitrator despite the demand of the opposite party, it forfeited the right to appoint one. After an application is made to the Chief Justice for appointment of an arbitrator the inactive party cannot come up with his nominee, the court stated in the judgment, Deep Trading Company vs Indian Oil Corporation. In this case, the corporation granted dealership of its oil products to the former firm. Later, the corporation suspended its supplies alleging violation of the terms. The firm wanted arbitration on the dispute. At first, the corporation did respond. But when the dealer moved the Allahabad Chief Justice under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the corporation named one of its executives as arbitrator. The Chief Justice, therefore, did not appoint an arbitrator. The dealer moved the Supreme Court. It stated that the corporation had failed to act as required under the procedure agreed

Failure to nominate arbitrator

Legislation by intuition and not public debate can land courts in a mess

When judges make the law

The Supreme Court last week imposed Rs 50 lakh as exemplary costs while dismissing the appeal of PGF Ltd against the order of the Punjab and Haryana high court for committing investment irregularities.

Penalty on investment company

States often misuse emergency powers to muzzle protests from owners

'Public purpose' in land grabs

The Supreme Court stated last week that a high court cannot interfere with the discretionary power of the arbitrator to fix the rate of interest in the award. When there is no mention of interest in the contract, the arbitrator has discretion to award interest on the amount awarded. In this case, P Radhakrishna Murthy vs NBCC Ltd, the arbitrator rejected the claim of interest at the rate of 24 per cent. On appeal, the civil court ruled that the arbitrator's view that he could not award interest was wrong in law. It awarded 16.5 per cent. The matter went up to the Karnataka High Court. It reduced the interest to 12 per cent, the bank rate prevailing at that time (1988). The contractor appealed to the Supreme Court, but it dismissed the appeal and confirmed the interest awarded by the high court.Mining lease order quashedThe Supreme Court last week set aside the order of the Orissa High Court in a case involving iron and manganese ore mining lease in favour of M/s Mesco Steel Ltd. The hi

M J Antony: Arbitrator free to fix interest

The Budget makes no effort to address the neglect of the legal system

The Cinderella syndrome

A high court cannot direct the state to part with its exclusive privilege in the matter of granting licence for establishing distilleries under the Foreign Liquor (Compounding, Blending and Bottling) Rules, 1975 and the Abkari Act. The Supreme Court stated so last week while allowing the appeal of the Kerala government in the case, State of Kerala vs Kandath Distilleries. It overturned the judgment of the Kerala high court on this question. In this case, the government received a large number of applications from liquor manufacturers for setting up units in different districts of the state. However, Kandath was not granted licence as the government maintained that its application was defective. The distillery moved the high court which stated that the government had ingenuously made a classification to weed out the firm and ordered it to grant licence. The government appealed to the Supreme Court and it set aside the high court judgment.  It said that no one has a right to get the lice

M J Antony: Liquor licence not a legal right

Both lenders and borrowers use legal armoury to serve their interests

M J Antony: The long road to debt recovery

High courts should not exercise its writ powers to interfere in debt recovery matters, the Supreme Court has stated in the case, T P Vishnu Kumar vs Canara Bank. The bank moved the tribunal for recovering open cash credit, packing credit and foreign bills of exchange. The firm countered the move by demanding several documents from the bank. The latter opposed the demand stating that they were not germane to the case and it was made only to protract proceedings. This was accepted by the tribunal. The firm moved the Madras high court against it and succeeded before the single bench. The division bench, however, ruled that the firm should have moved the appellate tribunal and not the high court. The Supreme Court upheld this view. Chastising the single judge bench, the Supreme Court stated that â€œif the correctness or otherwise of each and every interim order passed by the tribunal is going to be tested in a high court, it will only defeat the object and purpose of establishing such trib

M J Antony

M J Antony

Page 20 - M J Antony