Federal Commissioner of Taxation, [1931] A. Another aspect that has to be kept in view is that, according to the terms of the agreement of 1933, under which the Railway is demanding the enhanced charges, the Railway was entitled to charge for freight on the traffic over the assisted siding. 275, Bharat Bank Limited v. 11, inclusive of CRU of £22,473. “‘ It may be noted that the competent legislative body to levy terminal taxes on goods or passengers, carried by the appellant’s system, which will be a ‘railway’, under Art.
Even applying the popular test, adopted by the House of Lords, in this case, the appellant is undoubtedly a . 29(1) of the Act will apply to rates of charges for carrying goods from station to station over the railway itself, in such a case, the Central Government can fix the maximum and minimum rates, whereas the actual rates to be charged can be fixed by the Railway Administration itself. State of Bombay, [1963] S. So also in the Allahabad case, the Assistant Registrar merely acted as an arbitrator.
We are only adverting to this decision to show that, on the basis of an interpretation placed by the Courts, the House of Lords held that the word ‘railways’, in the Public Health Act, 1875, will not take in ‘tramways’. In Summers the issue was what remedies were available to the employer and its insurers, whereas in the instant case the issue arises out of a settlement agreement reached between the parties on 3 October 2003, the accident having occurred on 9 June 1998.
But, no such circumstances, as pointed out by the House of Lords, in the said decision, exist in the present case before us. The employer’s case was conducted on its behalf by its liability insurer, Zurich Insurance Company Plc (“Zurich”), which is the appellant in this appeal. 41(1)(c) of the Act We are unable to accept this submission made on behalf of the Railway. In this case a dispute arising out of certain resolutions passed by the Hind Provincial Flying Club were referred to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies under the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act of Uttar Pradesh and the Registrar delegated his powers to the Assistant Registrar to arbitrate in the matter.
“Terminal taxes on goods or passengers, carried by railway, sea or air; taxes on railway fares and freights. On the other hand, the position is -exactly the opposite, as will be seen from the Government of India Act, 1935, and the Constitution. 29(2) of the Act, and, on the same basis, they will not be charges covered by s. The Assistant Registrar issued an injunction that no further meeting should be called and this direction was flouted and disobeyed. Since the claim is made under the terms and conditions of the agreement, we hold that the Tribunal was wrong in rejecting the mode of calculation put forward by the Railway, on the ground that 235 it was not possible to estimate the difference in time required for shunting wagons to lines 3 and 4, as compared with the shunting to line 5.
This charge for carriage of goods over the railway or part of a railway is the only charge in respect of goods which can be the subjectmatter of a complaint under s. Employees of Bharat Bank Ltd. 459, Maqbool Hussain v. It appears, therefore, that one NRI Lawyers of the principal purposes of Part 4, as envisaged NRI Legal services at that stage, was to alter the existing law in relation to the sharing of NRI information about children and young people, so as to enable information about concerns about their wellbeing, held by individual bodies, to be pooled in the hands of named persons and NRI Lawyers shared with other bodies, with the ultimate aim of promoting their wellbeing.
The learned Judge came to the conclusion that “only those arbitrators can be deemed to be courts who are appointed through a court and not those arbitrators who function without the intervention of a court. ” In our opinion, neither of these decisions lays down any reasoning which would compel us to hold that the Assistant NRI Legal services Registrar of Co-operative Societies in this case was not a court. In the Bombay case, the matter was referred to the Assistant Registrar as a nominee who had to act as an arbitrator and make an award.
As the United Nations Commission on nrillegalservices Human Rights put it, in resolution 2003/45: Obviously, to deny women protection against gender-based violence, such that they cannot live an equal life with men, is discrimination against them in the enjoyment of NRI Lawyers their fundamental rights. This charge for freight on the traffic over the assisted siding was to be levied irrespective of the fact NRI Lawyers that, in some cases, the Railway may not be incurring extra expenditure over and above what it would have incurred if the delivery had been given at the goods platform on line 5.
If any person has a grievance that the rate being charged by the Railway is excessive, he can complain to the Tribunal, and the complaint would be covered by the provisions of s. 11, in full and final settlement of Mr Hayward’s claim. The agreement was made shortly before the issue of quantum was due to be tried and was incorporated in a Tomlin Order. The employer (in practice Zurich) agreed to pay £134,973. [1950] INSC 20; [1950] S.