SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(SC) 235

K. G. BALAKRISHNAN, R. V. RAVEENDRAN, J. M. PANCHAL
KONE ELEVATOR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF TAMIL NADU – Respondent


ORDER

1. The question raised for consideration in these petitions is whether manufacture, supply and installation of lifts is to be treated as "sale" or "works contract". As the writ petitions filed by the petitioners have raised important questions of law, the matters have been directed to be placed before a three-Judge Bench.

2. Heard Mr Harish N. Salve, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr Anoop Chaudhari, learned Senior Counsel for the State of Andhra Pradesh and the learned counsel for the States of Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh and Tamil Nadu.

3. In State of A.P. v. Kone Elevators (India) Ltd. 1 it was held that such a contract constituted a "sale" and does not amount to "works contract" and the element of service provided by the vendor of the elevator was negligible. The learned Senior Counsel Mr Chaudhari submitted that having regard to the nature of the contracts, the said view was not correct. Our attention was drawn to a series of decisions rendered by this Court in State of Rajasthan v. Man Industrial Corpn. Ltd., State of Rajasthan v. Nenu Ram and Vanguard Rolling Shutters & Steel Works v. CSP which take a contrary view. The said decisions have not been noticed in Ko


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top