Delhi Court July 1983 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Globe Motors Ltd. Vs. Mehta Teja Singh and Co.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-05-1983
Reported in: [1984]55CompCas445(Delhi); 24(1983)DLT214
RaJindar Sachar, J.(1) This is an appeal filed against the order of the learned single Judge by which he allowed the application under Section So of the Arbitration Act filed by the respondents. (2) The respondent's case was that an agreement had been entered into with the appellant company which is now under liquidation by means of an agreement dated 1-6-1967011 the terms mentioned therein. In the said agreement it was also stated that any dispute or difference arising in regard to any of the terms contained in the agreement, shall be settled in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration Act. The application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act was filed in November, 197.3. (3) It may be noted that application for winding up of M/s Globe. Motors Ltd. was moved in March, 1968 Globe motors was having one of its industrial units manufacturing steel under the name of Globe Steels. The agreement purports to appoint the respondents as distributors for the gale and marketing l/6th ...
Chander Kishore Sharma and anr. Vs. Kampa Wati
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-04-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Delhi14; 24(1983)DLT316; 1983(5)DRJ325
M.L. Jain, J. (1) Kampa Wati is the owner of the property in dispute, namely, first floor in premises No. 148-E, Kamla Nagar, Delhi, comprising two rooms. The property was let to Chander Kishore Sharma in 1961 on a rent of Rs. 55.00 per month. The landlady filed an eviction petition on the grounds of default in payment of rent on 2/11/1976. It was alleged that the tenant had not paid the arrears of rent despite notice of demand. At the time the petition was filed, rent of Rs. 490.00was in arrears. On 14/2/1977, she applied for amendment of the petition. The amended petition was filed on 12/4/1977, She pleaded an additional ground that the tenant had sublet, assigned or otherwise parted with possession of one room in favor of his son Chander Parkash, respondent No. 2, who is carrying on the watch repairing business in the name of Sheelak Watch Co. which was also added as a party. He is charging from him Rs. 50.00 p.m. Respondent No. 2 did not appear, while respondent No. 1 filed a writt...
Krishan Das and anr. Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-04-1983
Reported in: 1983(5)DRJ224; 1984(1)SLJ172(Delhi)
A.B. Rohatgi, J. (1) These two writ petitions substantially raise one question. That is about the validity of the combined seniority list dated 21st April 1979 which was framed in pursuance of the letter of the Government of India dated 6th October 1978. In the last analysis it is the validity of the letter dated 6th October, 1978 which is in question in these two petitions.(2) For the sake of convenience I will take up Civil Writ Petition No. 977 of 1979 first. Kishan Das and Brij Lal are the two petitioners in this case. They were denied the Selection Grade of Pharmacist by the Union of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. So they filed this petition claiming the selection grade.(3) In the Central Government Health Scheme (C.G.H.S.) there were the following posts of Pharmacists Grade-11, Pharmacists, Pharmacists-cum-Clerk/Store-Keeper and lastly the Selection Grade. Prior to the Third Pay Commission their scales of pay were much lower. The Third Pay Commission raised, their ...
Man Mohan Mehra Vs. J.S. Butalia
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-04-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Delhi32; 24(1983)DLT165; 1983(5)DRJ317; 1983RLR711
M.L. Jain, J. (1) Sh. J.S. Butalia constructed a house in 1975 in Gulmohar Park, while residing in a rented premises in Jangpura He and his wife both had obtained loans and had to let out the premises to repay the loan. His landlord however, filed an eviction application in 1976 in which eviction order was passed in 1978 and an undertaking to vacate was given by Sh.Butalia in the appeal. He vacated the Jangpura house in 197) in compliance with the undertaking to the court and occupied the first floor of his owa house which has two bed rooms and a living room etc. The ground floor of the house consisted of one dining cum drawing room and three bed rooms, one kitchen, etc. The ground floor had been let out to the present tenant Sh. M.M. Mehra with effect from 1/8/1977 at the monthly rent of Rs. 1,400.00 without any written agreement or rent note. On 12/5/1981 Sh. Butalia filed this eviction application under Section 25B read with clause (e) of the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 14...
Alembic Glass Industries Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-02-1983
Reported in: (1987)(31)ELT310TriDel
1. The Revision Application dated 17-5-1980 against Order No.S/49-523/80, dated 23-4-1980 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Bombay, has been transferred by the Government of India to the Tribunal for disposal in terms of Section 131B(2) of the Customs Act, 1962.2. A refund claim arising out of re-assessment of Molybdenum Glass Electrodes under Heading 85.11 or 85.18/27(3) as against original assessment under Heading 45.12 made vide B/E No. 2124, dated 18-5-1979 on the ground that the said electrodes are not heating resistors, was rejected as untenable by the Asstt. Collector of Customs (Refunds). He held that the correct classification of the electrodes would be under Heading 81.01/ 04(1) which attracts the same rate of duty as Heading 85.12 of CTA 1975. Collector of Customs (Appeals) confirmed the Asstt.Collector's decision giving reference to another case, appeal No.S/49-4/79, dated 1-3-1979. The operative part of that order is reproduced below : "I have considered the ap...
Commercial Ahmedabad Mills Co. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-02-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC1175DTri(Delhi)
1. In this case, the Appellants imported Darex Versaprint Blankets for use in textile printing machinery. The goods were assessed to customs duty under heading 40.05/16(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as a rubber manufacture,. The appellants filed a refund claim on the ground that the goods were correctly assessable under heading 59.16/17 as a textile article of a kind commonly used in machinery. The Assistant Collector rejected their claim on the ground that the goods were predominantly rubber manufacture. In their appeal to the Appellate Collector, the appellants sought re-assessment of the goods under heading 84.40 as a spare part of textile printing machinery. The Appellate Collector rejected this claim also on the ground that Note 1 (a) to Section XVI of the Customs Tariff excluded articles of unhardened vulcanized rubber used on machinery. In their revision application to the Central Government (since transferred to this Tribunal and taken up as the subject appeal), the appel...
Olembic Glass Industries Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-02-1983
Reported in: (1983)(14)ELT2022TriDel
1. The Revision Application dated 17-5-1980 against order No.S/49-523/80 dated 23-4-1980 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Bombay, has been transferred by the Government of India to the Tribunal for disposal in terms of Sec. 131B (2) of the Customs Act, 1962.2. A refund claim arising out of re-assessment of Molybdenum Glass Electrodes under heading 85.11 or 85.18/27 (3) as against original assessment under heading 85.12 made vide B/E No. 2124 dated 18-5-1979 on the ground that the said electrodes are not heating resistors, was rejected as untenable by the Asstt. Collector of Customs (Refunds). He held that the correct classification of the electrodes would be under heading 81.01/04 (I) which attracts the same rate of duty as heading 85.12 of CTA 1975. Collector of Customs (Appeals) confirmed the Asstt.Collector's decision giving reference to another case, appeal No.S/49-4/79 dated 1-3-1979. The operative part of that order is reproduced below : "I have considered the appeal...
Paresh Products Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-02-1983
Reported in: (1983)LC1171DTri(Delhi)
1. In this case, the appellants imported acrylic crushed scrap. The goods were assessed to basic customs duty under heading 39.01/06 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. In addition, countervailing duty as applicable under Item 15A of the Central Excise Tariff was charged on them. The appellants filed a refund claim on two counts - (1) the goods were articles made of plastics and should be assessed under Heading 39.07 CTA, and (2) No countervailing duty should be charged as articles of plastics were exempt from such duty under exemption Notification No. 228/76-Cus.The Assistant Collector rejected their claims on the ground that the goods were waste and scrap which fell under Heading 39.01/06 CTA and that Item 15 A GET covered plastic- materials in all forms. Before the Appellate Collector, the appellants pressed for their claim only in respect of exemption from countervailing duty. The Appellate Collector rejected it on the ground that the goods-crushed sheet scrap-were still plastic shee...
A.M. Awasthy Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-02-1983
Reported in: (1983)6ITD150(Delhi)
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the AAC and relates to the assessment year 1976-77.2. The appeal is noted to be late by one day and having perused the assessee's request for condonation of delay, we have admitted the appeal and condoned the delay.3. The assessee is an employee of ONGC, Dehradun. In the relevant financial year up to 19-9-1975, the assessee was posted in Iraq where ONGC was having its project.. There were certain service conditions for the employees posted abroad and according to that the assessee was getting some foreign allowance and project allowance for his duty in Iraq. Besides this, the assessee was provided with free furnished accommodation in Iraq. The details of the furnishing were also determined in advance. One of the conditions of the service was that the income-tax payable in Iraq was to be borne by the employee, while the Indian income-tax, if any, accruing on and payable by him in India, during his tenure abroad, would be b...
General Manager (Stores), Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-01-1983
Reported in: (1983)(14)ELT2047TriDel
1. In this Revision application, transferred to this Tribunal and heard by us as an appeal pursuant to Section 131B of the Customs Act, 1962, the Appellant seeks reassessment of Items 3 to 7 of the Bill of Entry at 40% ad-valorem under the Heading 85.18/27(3) instead of at 60% under Heading 85.18/27(1).2. The Appellant would appear to have failed to produce any evidence, whatsoever, for the claim and it was accordingly rejected as unsubstantiated by the Assistant Collector of Customs.3. In appeal the Appellate Collector rejected this particular claim while allowing others.4. The goods in question are Insulators which had been imported along with various spares. They are used as high voltage Insulators of main Insalating Switches provided in MANEMU coaches. Their working voltage is 1500 Volts.5. We have heard the representative of the Appellant, Shri T.C.Francis, an Asstt. Electrical Foreman in the Central Railways and Shri K.K. Ajwani, JDR for the Respondent.6. A perusal of the releva...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »