TTM » Topics » Cases before the High Court

This excerpt taken from the TTM 6-K filed Sep 29, 2008.

Cases before the High Court

 

1. A writ petition has been filed by the Company before the High Court of Jharkhand against the State of Jharkhand and others for quashing the proceeding arising out of a criminal complaint filed under section 92 of the Factories Act, 1949 against Mr. SJ Ghandy, then occupier of the Factory and Mr. A C Sinha, then Manager under the Factories Act. The matter is currently pending.

 

179


Table of Contents
2. Seven cases have been filed by employees of the Company (in their capacity as employees of the Company) before the High Court of Jharkhand against the State of Jharkhand and others for quashing orders passed by various courts such as the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Judicial Magistrate, Chief Judicial Magistrate, etc., in relation to complain cases filed against them. The matters are in various stages of adjudication.

 

3. Two cases have been filed by the Company before the High Court of Jharkhand against the State of Jharkhand and the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation for rescinding the demand made by the ESI Corporation against the Company for an amount of Rs. 4.9 million and for exemption from the provisions of the Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948. The matters are currently pending.

 

4. The Company has filed a case before the High Court of Jharkhand, against the State of Jharkhand seeking refund of the road tax on chassis, etc. for the period 1979 to 1993. The matter is currently pending.

 

5. Two appeals have been filed by the Company before the High Court of Jharkhand against the State of Jharkhand for quashing the Government notification abolishing contract system in the horticulture sector. The matters are currently pending.

 

6. Six appeals have been filed by the Company before the High Court of Jharkhand, against the judgments passed by various courts such as, Ist Additional District Judge, Jharkand and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jharkhand with respect to matters pertaining to recovery of money, title of land, eviction of land and compensation. The matters are in various stages of adjudication.

 

7. 17 writ petitions have been filed by the Company before the High Court of Jharkhand against the State of Jharkhand and various persons challenging the orders passed by various courts and authorities such as the Labour Court, Provident Fund Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner of Cooperative Societies, Deputy Commissioner of Cooperative Societies, etc. in various labour related matters. The matters are in various stages of adjudication.

 

8. Four writ petitions have been filed by the Company before the High Court of Jharkhand, against the orders passed by various courts and authorities such as the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, State Consumer Redressal Commission, the Commissioner South Chotanagpur, etc. in relation to issues such as deficiencies in services, property matters, etc. The matters are in various stages of adjudication.

 

9. The Company has filed a writ petition, in the High Court of Bombay, in relation to the approach adopted by the Labour Courts in deciding the cases filed before them by various dismissed employees of the Company. The Company claims that while proceeding with the references filed before them, the Labour Courts are required to decide as to whether the findings of the Enquiry Officer are legal and proper at the preliminary stage only. The matter is currently pending.

 

10. The Company has filed ten writ petitions before the High Court of Bombay against various dismissed employees of the Company in relation to orders passed by the Labour Court, Pune and the Industrial Court, Pune. The orders of the Labour Court, Pune and the Industrial Court, Pune include, reinstatement of employees dismissed by the Company, etc. The matters are currently pending.

 

11. The Company has filed three appeals in the High Court of Bombay, against various persons challenging the orders of the lower courts in relation to applications filed by the Company under ESI, etc. The ESI courts had held the Company was liable for ESI contributions. The amount involved in these cases is Rs. 1.54 million. The matters are currently pending.

 

12. The Company has filed a writ petition before the High Court of Bombay, against Pimpri Chinchwad New Township Development Authority (“PCNTDA”), challenging the respondent’s decision to take back 14.36 acres of land allotted to the Company. PCNTDA has appeared in the matter and has stated that it would not implement the decision to take back the additional land. The matter is currently pending.

 

180


Table of Contents
13. The Company has filed three writ petition before the High Court of Bombay, against PCMC on various grounds including octroi levied on the Company, etc. The amount involved in these cases is Rs. 350 million. The matters are currently pending.

 

14. The Company has filed a writ petition before the High Court of Bombay against Mr. Dattu Aher and others, challenging the order passed by District Court, Pune, rejecting the 9A application filed by the Company challenging the maintainability of the Civil Suit No. 1478/98 before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune. The matter is currently pending.

 

15. The Company has filed a writ petition, in the High Court, Allahabad, against the order of the District Judge, Kanpur, setting aside the order passed by the Registrar of Trade Unions, Kanpur in relation to the cancellation of the registration of the Telco Karmachari Sangh. The High Court has directed the parties to file counter affidavit and rejoinder statement. The matter is currently pending.

 

16. The Company has filed an appeal before the High Court of Bombay and the Supreme Court against PCMC, in relation to the demand for the payment of octroi of Rs. 442.8 million for the period from October 1997 to March 2002. The dispute is in relation to the classification of motor vehicle components for levy of octroi. The matter is currently pending.

 

17. The Company has filed a case before the High Court of Bombay against Mr. Piyush Shah, a shareholder of the Company, claiming Rs. 150 million as damages and to restrain Mr. Shah from making any defamatory remarks against the Company. The matter is currently pending.
Wikinvest © 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. Use of this site is subject to express Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, and Disclaimer. By continuing past this page, you agree to abide by these terms. Any information provided by Wikinvest, including but not limited to company data, competitors, business analysis, market share, sales revenues and other operating metrics, earnings call analysis, conference call transcripts, industry information, or price targets should not be construed as research, trading tips or recommendations, or investment advice and is provided with no warrants as to its accuracy. Stock market data, including US and International equity symbols, stock quotes, share prices, earnings ratios, and other fundamental data is provided by data partners. Stock market quotes delayed at least 15 minutes for NASDAQ, 20 mins for NYSE and AMEX. Market data by Xignite. See data providers for more details. Company names, products, services and branding cited herein may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The use of trademarks or service marks of another is not a representation that the other is affiliated with, sponsors, is sponsored by, endorses, or is endorsed by Wikinvest.
Powered by MediaWiki