Delhi Court May 1988 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.
Chander Shekhar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-13-1988
Reported in: 1988(2)Crimes834; 35(1988)DLT21; 1989(16)DRJ14
M.K. Chawla, J. (1) Shri Ravish Khanna and his father Rajinder Nath Khanna are the residents of Moradabad (U.P.). They were running their business in the name and style of Sunbeam Exports at Railway Road, Moradabad. In connection with their business, they used to visit Delhi quite often. They had taken flat No. 22, Sunder Nagar Market, New Delhi, on rent for their stay during their business visits. They had engaged Shri Nathu, aged about 35/40 years as the servant for their Delhi establishment. He was Caretaker of the flat in their absence. (2) On 31st May, 1982, Ravish Khanna came to Delhi at about 8 P.M. and found the outer/staircase door locked. He searched for his servant Nathu. He also made enquiries from the neighbours who informed him that they had not seen Nathu for the last 4/5 days. Consequently, he telephoned his father at Moradabad to enquire about the keys of the flat. Rajinder Nath Khanna informed that the keys were left with Nathu and he (Ravish Khanna) should search for...
Vinod Kumar Khanna Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-13-1988
Reported in: 35(1988)DLT167
P.K. Bahri, J. (1) This petition has been brought under the Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order dated April 8, 1988 passed Shri R.L. Chugh, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, by which he bad issued a proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requiring the appearance of the petitioner as an accused in case R.C, 1 of 1988, on the 24th May 1988. (2) The facts in brief are that the case has been registered by the C.B.I, under Sections 3 & 5 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and one Lt. Gen. (Retd) Nirmal Puri. According to the C.B.I, this petitioner was required to appear before the Investigating Officer on 2nd March, 1988 vide notice dated 23rd February 1988. But the petitioner who is in foreign country could not be served and an official of the company of which the petitioner is the Chairman had informed that the petitioner would be apprised about this on his return ...
Rajiv Kumar and ors. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-13-1988
Reported in: 36(1988)DLT164
Charanjit Talwar, J. (1) This is an appeal in which the case property including the weapons of offence has not been produced before us during arguments and thus we have been deprived from fully assessing it on merits.During the course of arguments, Mr. G.S.Sharma, learned counsel for theState, made the following statement on 14/04/1988 : 'THE case property including the weapon of offence is no longer available as it was auctioned.' In support of his statement, Mr. Sharma filed the report of the District Nazir of the Deputy Commissioner's Office which report has been placed on record. (2) Mrs. Anjana Gosain, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that non-production of the case property is a serious infirmity which must be held to be fatal to the prosecution case and on that ground alone the three appellants are entitled to be acquitted. We would, however, advert to this aspect after noticing the facts. (3) Rajiv Kumar, his brother Purshottam and their brother-in-law,namely. Ram C...
CamlIn Private Limited Vs. National Pencil Industries
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-13-1988
Reported in: AIR1988Delhi393; 1988(2)ARBLR246(Delhi); 35(1988)DLT352; 1988RLR450
C.L. Chandbry, J. (1) The plaintiff has preferred this suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from manufacturing, selling offering for sale or dealing, in the pencils bearing the distinctive floral design, colour combination, lay out and arrangement of artistic features of the plaintiff's pencil Flora and from reproducing the floral design, colour combination, lay out and arrangement of artistic features of the cartons pertaining to the their Flora pencils and from doing any other thing as is likely to infringe the plaintiff's copyright in respect of its Flore pencil cartons and also restraining the defendants from maufacturing, selling or dealing in pencils under the trade mark Flore or any other mark as is identical to and/or deceptively similar with the trade mark Flora of the plaintiff. (2) The case of the plaintiff as set up in the plaint, is that the plaintiff is one of the largest manufacturers of art and stationery materials and is exclusively marketing the go...
Ram Parshad Vs. Employee States' Insurance Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-13-1988
Reported in: 35(1988)DLT369
D.P. Wahdwa, J. (1) This second appeal is against the judgments and decrees of both the courts below whereby suit of the appellant (plaintiff) for a declaration that his establishment was not covered under the provisions of the Employees State insurance Act, 1984 (for short 'the Act') was dismissed. (2) The plaintiff claimed that he was proprietor of M/s Delhi Steel and Foundry Works which establishment at no point of time employed more than eighteen employees. Plaintiff said thereforee, that he was no covered under the Act as the Act applied only to establishments or factories which employed twenty or more persons at any point of time preceding twelve months. Plaintiff said his establishment was not required to be registered under the Act and provisions of that Act would not apply to him. Plaintiff said he had come to know that his establishment was being covered under the Act and that Employees State Insurance Corporation (for short 'the Corporation') defendant No. I, had in fact dir...
Wheelabrator Alloy Castings Ltd. Vs. Collector of C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-12-1988
Reported in: (1989)(39)ELT579TriDel
1. The dispute in this appeal is the assessment of shots and grits. The appellants, M/s. Wheelabrator Alloy Castings explained that the shots and grits are made by an unconventional process of casting. Steel scrap is melted in an electric furnace. The molten metal is atomised into shots of different sizes, most of which are round in shape. These shots are subsequently cut into angular shape by machines to get grits. The appellants have marshalled a considerable array of material to support their contention that the shots are castings and that the department was wrong in rejecting their assessments under Central Excise Tariff Item 26AA.2. The first is the Indian Standard Specification IS:4606-1968 SPECIFICATION FOR STEEL SHOT FOR USE IN FOUNDRIES. In the foreword the Standard describes the steel shot as a product obtained by atomising molten steel into random sizes. While formulating the standard, ISI has taken into consideration the trade practices followed in the country in the field...
The General Industrial Society Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-12-1988
Reported in: (1988)(17)ECC29
1. In this case appellants manufacture viscose staple fibre yarn of 15-80 counts, and pay duty on it under tariff item 18-III(i).Thereafter the two yarns are twisted together to make multiple fold yarn. Appellants submit that in the process of twisting together, the staple fibre yarn does not lose its identity and the resultant product continues to be classifiable under tariff item 18 III(i). It is pointed out in this connection that as per the Explanation contained in item 18 III itself, multiple fold yarn is included under the tariff entry, and therefore no further duty would be payable on such yarn.2. We have heard Shri Gopal Prasad, consultant for the appellants and Shri K.C. Sachar, JDR for the department.3. Shri Gopal Prasad, at the very outset, has furnished a copy of the orders of this Bench No. 132/87-D dated 10-2-1987 in Appeal No.E-1654/81-D filed by the same appellants. It is submitted that this order fully covered the issue in favour of the appellants. The learned consult...
Anand Motors Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-12-1988
Reported in: (1989)(41)ELT417TriDel
1. The issue in this appeal is regard ing the liability for payment of additional duty of customs on the wind-shield glasses im ported by the appellants M/s. Anand Motors. The Assistant Collector demanded duty under item 23-A(4) CET and the appeal against the same was dismissed by the Collec tor (Appeals) under his order dated 31-1-1984. This appeal is against the said order.2. We have heard Shri Harbans Singh, Advocate for the appellants and Smt. Zutshi for the Department.3. The Supreme Court held in the case of M/s. Atul Glass Industries Ltd. (1986 Vol. 25 ELT 473) that wind-shield glasses of motor vehicles are classifiable under item 68-CET and not under item 23-A(4).Following the said decision we hold that the or ders of the lower authorities were incorrect.4. We accordingly allow the appeal, set aside the orders of lower authorities and direct assessment under item 68-CET for purpose of additional duty of customs and order consequential relief....
Mohd. Habib Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-12-1988
Reported in: 1989CriLJ137; 1988(2)Crimes677; 35(1988)DLT170
Charanjit Talwar, J. (1) The appellant, Mohd. Habib, was convicted for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, for having committed rape on a minor girl, Aruna Kumari, on 19th August 1980 at about 2.00 p m. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. He has also been convicted for the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00 . In default of payment of fine, he has been directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The appellant challenges the legality of the judgment dated 11th October 1983, holding him guilty of the above mentioned charges, and also the order of the same date sentencing him. (2) The central point to be noticed in this appeal is that the medical evidence falsifies the evidence of the two eye witnesses as well as of the prosecutrix. The appellant, aged 21 years, is alleged to have been arrested at the spot. He was medically examined by Dr...
Shri Ram Fibres Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-11-1988
Reported in: (1988)(17)LC683Tri(Delhi)
1. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants manufacture nylon moulding powder (hereinafter referred to as NMP Chips) falling under item No. 15A of the Central Excise Tariff out of caprolactum, a chemical derived from raw naphtha. Effective rate of central excise duty on NMP chips as per notification No. 5/80-CE dated 27.2.1980 was 40% ad valorem. However, under notification No. 7/80-CE dated 27.2.1980 a concessional rate of duty of 36% ad valorem was available to NMP chips manufactured out of raw naphtha or any chemical derived therefrom on which duty of excise at the appropriate rate had already been paid.On 14.7.1982, the appellants filed a refund claim claiming refund of differential duty on NMP chips cleared during the period from 3.11.1981 to 29.4.1982 on the ground that the NMP chips were manufactured out of caprolactum, which was a chemical derived from raw naphtha and was to be assessed at concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 7/80-CE dated 27.2.1980...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »