Delhi Court May 1986 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.
Chinar Trust and ors. Vs. Usha International Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-30-1986
Reported in: 30(1986)DLT373
Sunanda Bhandare, J.(1) This is an application (I A. 2347/86) under Order 39 Rule 4 read with Section 151 Civil Procedure Code filed by the defendant wherein the defendant has prayed that the ex-parte injunction granted by this Court on 1st April 1986 be vacated and the suit as well as the application filed by the plaintiffs be dismissed. (2) The facts of the case lie in a very narrow compass. Plaintiff no. 1 is a registered proprietor of the trade mark Usha for various goods namely Mixing machines for kitchen use, room heaters, stoves, hot plates for cooking and electric irons etc. for which various registration numbers are assigned to them. Plaintiff no. 2 is a Trust and is engaged in trading in goods including Mixes bearing the trade mark Usha under the license of plaintiff no. 1. Plaintiff no. 3 is a marketing organisation which markets the Usha mixer grinders of plaintiffs 1 and 2. The plaintiffs claim to be owning the trade mark Usha for more than seven years. On 1st February 196...
Rattan Lal Vs. Mahabir Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-30-1986
Reported in: 30(1986)DLT148
M.K. Chawla, J.(1) The petitioner, Shri Rattan Lal is the owner/landlord of i of the property bearing No. 4070-4072. Naya Bazar, Delhi. Shri Ram Sarup, respondent No. 3 is in occupation of this portion of the property as tenant @ Rs. 123.32 per mensem. On 28-4-1969 the petitioner filed an application under Section 19 of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act against the respondent. Ram Samp for instituting a suit for obtaining a decree/order for his eviction on the following amongst other grounds : (A)That the tenant has not paid any rent since 1-1-1969 at the agreed rate of Rs. 123 32 per mensem ; (b) That the tenant has caused and permitted to be caused substantial damage to the property let out to him-total damage assessed at Rs. 55.000.00 . (c) That the tenant has started using the premises as a godown for storing oil, though it was given to him for being used as a shop- there is misuse of the premises ; (d) That the tenant has sublet, assigned or otherwise parted with poss...
Collector of Central Excise and Vs. Modern Steel Ltd. and ors.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-29-1986
Reported in: (1986)(9)ECC82
1. These appeals are from the Collectors of Central Excise, Chandigarh and Jabalpur against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi.2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of steel ingots out of iron and steel melting scrap with the aid of electric arc furnace and during the manufacture of the goods, runners and risers are also produced and these had been cleared by the respondents without payment of duty or at concession rate of duty in terms of notification No. 237/75 as amended and by notification No. 235/77, or by notification No. 156/79 and 53/80 as the case may be.The demand in respect of clearance of these runners and risers raised by the Department under the ground that benefit of the notification was available only in respect of ingots and not for clearance of runners and risers which have been described by the Department as steel melting scrap. These runners and risers are put to various uses after clearanc...
Shakti Udyog Vs. Collector Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-29-1986
Reported in: (1986)(10)ECC164
1. This appeal came before the bench on 18.4.1986. It was found that there was some unclarity about the proper transfer of the revision petition from the Government of India to this Tribunal. The Registry reported that the matter had indeed been regularly transferred. The appeal was then heard on 14.5.1986.2. The learned Counsel for the appellants argued that his main contention was that M/s. Shakti Udyog could not be regarded as the manufacturers of the steel utensils made by M/s. Mittal Steel Works, Vishwakarma Industries, Mittal Industries and Nishkam Udyog on their behalf, even though they sent stainless steel flats to them for the purpose. The manufacturer of the steel utensil is that person who makes the utensil from the raw material steel sheet or flat, and not the supplier of the steel sheet or even the owner of the utensil. It might be true, said the counsel, that they owned the steel sheets and utensils made from them; but they were not the manufacturers of the utensil. The ...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. National Chemicals Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1986
Reported in: (1986)(8)LC346Tri(Delhi)
1. The Collector of Central Excise & Customs, New Delhi has filed an appeal being aggrieved from order in appeal No. 30-35/CE/DLH/85 dated 11.4.85 passed by the Collector (Appeals), Central Excise, New Delhi.The said appeal was presented in the Registry on 24.7.85. In column No.3 of the memorandum of appeal viz. EA-3 the date of communication of the copy of order in appeal has been mentioned as 12.4.85.Simultaneously the appellant had also filed an application for condonation of delay. The application for condonation of delay was also received in the Registry on 24.7.85. The applicant has also filed a statement explaining the reasons for delay in filing of the appeal. The said statement was duly received in the Registry on 30.1.86.2. Shri B.R. Tripathi, the learned SDR, has appeared on behalf of the applicants. He has reiterated the contention made in the application for condonation of delay and the statement explaining the reasons for delay with a list of dates starting from 1976...
Madhavnagar Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1986
Reported in: (1986)(9)ECC55
1. On hearing both sides, we observe that the appellants received the impugned order on 9.9.1985. As per the postal receipt, their appeal Was received in the Registry on 9.12.1985, i.e. within the prescribed period of three months. The appeal being in time, the application for condonation of delay is, infructuous and is dismissed as such.2. We then heard both sides on merits of the case. We find that the appellants manufacture cotton fabrics. Among their customers,, there are five industrial customers who require fabrics of a particular sort, quality and construction for their respective industrial use. Such fabrics are manufactured by the appellants against specific contracts entered into with these customers and are supplied exclusively to the respective customer. Some customers, like M/s. Leauko Plast, require that the fabrics to be supplied to them should be thoroughly checked, meter by meter, before delivery. The appellants arrange such checking and realise special checking charg...
B.P. Gupta and Others Vs. Standard Enamel Works (P.) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1986
Reported in: [1987]62CompCas36(Delhi)
S.B. Wad, J.1. This is a petition purportedly filed under section 433 of the Companies Act, 1956. Petitioner No.1 Mr. B.P. Gupta, is the creditor of the company and petitioners Nos.2 and 3, viz., Shri Suraj Prakash Gupta and Shrimati Madhuri Gupta, are the shareholders/ directors. Petitioner No. 1 has claimed that the respondent company has not returned the loan of Rs. 1,26,334.46 in spite of repeated demands. He has further claimed an amount of Rs. 18,000 by way of salary as the secretary of the respondent company for the period between April 1, 1984, to March 31, 1985. So far as Petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, the allegations are that they are illegally kept out of the management of the company. There are further allegations of mismanagement of the company, such as the illegal resolutions to appoint the chairman, the accumulation of losses of the company being far more than the paid-up capital and the losses exceeding 20 per cent of the paid-up capital. It is claimed that it ...
Satyawati Chaudhry Vs. Op. Nangia and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1986
Reported in: 30(1986)DLT187; 1986RLR518
D.K. Kapur, C.J. (1) In this appeal, an interim application was moved for the purpose of interim stay in respect of the injunction granted by the learned single Judge We find that the questions covered by the interim application arc almost identical with the questions covered by the appeal. Having heard arguments on the interim application, we think the appeal can also be decided in the same terms. So, the appeal and the interim application are being decided together by this order. (2) The learned single Judge had granted the injunction to restrain the making of construction on the plot in question. This injunction was granted because the case of the plaintiff is that the land on which the defendant Shri Subash Chand is in the process of constructing the building is the land belonging to the plaintiff as a result of a sale deed executed on 27th September, 1985. The case of the said defendant, on the other hand,is that he had purchased that land by an deed dated 1st March, 1986. It so h...
India Jute Company Limited Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-27-1986
Reported in: (1986)(9)ECC51
1. This is an appeal against the order of the Appellate Collector, Customs, Calcutta who has partly allowed the appellants' plea for fixation of lower assessable value.2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants imported four numbers of second-hand Apron Draft Spinning Frames 4-3/4" pitch 96 spindle manufactured by M/s. James Machkie the year of manufacture being 1967. The Assistant Collector did not accept the invoiced value of 19,600.00 cif and fixed the price of the goods under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules 1963. It was noticed by the Customs authorities that the same appellants had imported similar second hand machines with the year of manufacture 1968 some time later for 40,000 cif. The Assistant Collector on the basis of the prices of the new machines at the time of manufacture and that of the new machines in 1980 when the quotation for the import of machines was obtained and after giving an allowance for depreciation at the rate of 6-1/4% and also appreciatio...
Coastal Papers Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-27-1986
Reported in: (1986)(8)LC213Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Coastal Papers Ltd., Rajahmundry has filed an appeal being aggrieved from order in appeal No. 391/79 dated 20.8.79. The said appeal was presented in the Registry on 13.1.1986.2. Shri M. Chandrasekharan, the learned advocate, has appeared on behalf of the applicants and Shri B.R. Tripathi, the learned SDR for the respondent. The matter had come up for hearing before the Bench on 7.3.1986. At the outset of the hearing the Bench had pointed out to the learned advocate that in Column No. 3 of the Memorandum of Appeal, the date of service has been mentioned "not known". To the Bench's query the learned Advocate stated that the appellant had filed writ petition in the Andhra Pradesh High Court and the writ petition was dismissed by the Hon. High Court vide Writ Petition No. 7590 of 1979, Order dated 16.12.85. The learned Advocate pleaded that as per direction of the Hon. High Court an appeal was to be filed in the Tribunal within four weeks from the date of Hon. High Court's order a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »