9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (2) TMI 308X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uring the period of emergency. On 5th Dec. 1962 the Central Government put into operation the Emergency Risks (Factories Insurance) Scheme (Hereinafter referred to as the Scheme). The Scheme continued to be in force during the proclamation of emergency and expired with the end of emergency on 10th Jan. 1968. As per the requirements of the Scheme and the, Act the petitioner 1 was required to obtain insurance policies for the period between 1963 to 1966. On 8th April, 1968 the Enforcement Officer attached to the office of the Chief Enforcement Office, Eastern Region, Emergency Risks Insurance Scheme, gave notice to the petitioner that he had reasons to believe that the petitioner 1 had failed to insure its property as required under the provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner as being time barred on the ground that the order of respondent 2 was received by the petitioner on 21st Sept. 1970 and the time limit of 30 days had already expired when the appeal was filed on 22nd Oct. 1970. 2. The petitioner, amongst other things, has challenged these orders of respondent 1 and respondent 2 in the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent 2 erred in ascertaining the rate of depreciation by taking the total depreciation provided in the balance-sheet of the petitioner and dividing it by the original cost of the said assets and applying the said rates to its replacement cost to arrive at the due depreciation as prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purpose of determining the period of limitation prescribed for any suit, appeal or application by any special or local law the provisions contained in Sections 4 to 24, which would include Section 5, shall apply in so far as and to the extent which they are not expressly excluded by such appeal or local law. Section 29, Sub-section (2), Clause (b) of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963 in clear and unambiguous terms provides for the applicability in Section 5 and the ratio of the decision in Kaushalya Rani's case can, therefore, have no application in cases governed by the Limitation Act, 1963, since that decision proceeded on the hypothesis that the applicability of Section 29(2)(b) of the Limitation Act, 1908. Since under the Limitation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
