Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.26 seconds)M/S.Northern Coalfields Ltd vs Heavy Engineering Corp.Ltd. & Anr on 13 July, 2016
8. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the
parties and taken note of the relevant facts in issue, undisputed by them,
and also legal position as it stands by virtue of judgments rendered by
the Apex Court in the case of ECIL (Supra) and Northern Coalfields
Limited (Supra). The extract of the decisions quoted above do not leave
any room of doubt that in a case of inter corporation dispute or dispute
between PSU and Ministry of Government, the aggrieved party could
file a suit or a case or appeal before a Tribunal/ Court of Law but the
Tribunal/Court could not proceed till the COD permission was granted.
The requirement of obtaining COD permission within 30 days was also
7
not sacrosanct, but the institution of the suit was not prohibited, as the
litigant was entitled to institute the proceeding to save limitation. The
only rider was that the concerned Tribunal or Court could not proceed
with the suit so long the COD permission was not taken.
Electronics Corp.Of India Limited vs Union Of India & Ors on 17 February, 2011
Hon'ble Supreme Court referred
the decisions rendered in the ONGC cases earlier and the Constitution
Bench judgment in the case of Electronics Corporation of India
Limited ( Supra) and further the office memorandum dated 12th June,
2013 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Industries and
Public Enterprises Department of Public Enterprises revising the
guidelines and deleting the earlier guidelines Para-13 that required
clearance from the committee on disputes. The net effect of the
discussions in the preceding paragraphs, have been summarized by
Hon'ble Court at paragraph-23.
Oil And Natural Gas Commission And Anr. vs Collector Of Central Excise on 11 October, 1991
The Hon'ble Court also took
into note the submission advanced by learned Attorney General that time
had come to revisit the orders passed by the three-Judge Bench of the
Apex Court in the case of Oil and Natural Gas Commission (Supra).
The matter was thereafter heard by a Constitution Bench of Five Judges
and the directions issued by the Apex Court in its various orders earlier
were recalled. Para 17 & 18 of the report is quoted hereunder:
The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996
Commr.Of Central Excise vs M/S Bharat Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. on 8 October, 2015
3. Being aggrieved by the order in original, the appellant preferred
an appeal before the learned CESTAT, Kolkata along with stay petition.
Meanwhile, in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Bharat
Petroleum Corporation Limited reported in (2010) 13 SCC 42, by
order dated 6th April, 2010, the Division Bench of the Apex Court
referred the matter relating to working of committee of disputes
constituted earlier by an order passed by a Bench of Three Judges of the
Apex Court in the case of Oil and Natural Gas Commission and
another Vs. Collector of Central Excise reported in 1995 Supp (4)
SCC 541 before the Larger Bench, taking note of the fact that numeral
difficulties have been experienced by COD in relation to disputes
between the Ministry of Government of India and public sector
undertakings of the Government of India.
1