Delhi Court October 1989 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.
Hari Krishan Gupta Vs. Jai Krishan Dass and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-06-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Delhi80; 40(1990)DLT361
Y.K. Sabharwal, J.(1) This family litigation has a chequered history. In order to appreciate the controversy between the parties it is necessary to give a brief resume of part litigation, pending suits and the facts.(2) Lala Girdhar Lal was son of Lala Panna Lal. There was a Joint Hindu Family of 'Panna Lal Girdhar Lal' which owned joint family business and properties, Lala Girdhar Lal had six sons, one of them being Bal Krishan Dass. Hari Krishan, Jai Krishan Dass, Brij Krishan, Chander Krishan and Avtar Krishan are sons of Bal Krishan Dass.SMT.Ram Kala Devi was wife of Bal Krishan Dass. Bal Krishan Dass had another son named Gopal Krishan. Bal Krishan Dass, Smt. Ram Kala Devi and Gopal Krishan Dass have since died. In the year 1961 Jai Krishan Das and his two minor sons filed a suit in the Court of Senior Sub Judge, Delhi, (Suit No. 317/61) claiming that they are members of Joint Hindu Family 'Panna Lal Girdhar Lal' which owns Joint Family business and the properties as given in the ...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Birla Jute and Industries Limited
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-05-1989
Reported in: (1990)(46)ELT569TriDel
In Appeal No. 239/89-C, arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.21-Qct./CE/JPR/88, dated 7-10-1988, the issue is whether benefit of concessional rate of excise duty under Notification No. 36/87-C.E., dated 1-3-1987 is admissible to the respondent. On the basis of their contention that they are entitled to such benefit, they have preferred six refund claims and appeals Nos. E/240/89-C to 245/89-C pertain to these refund claims. So, we have heard all these appeals together and are deciding them by this common order.2. The respondents are manufacturing cement in their factory, known as Birla Jute & Industries (hereinafter referred to as Birla Cement Works) at Chittorgarh, Rajasthan having Central Excise L4 licence. They were granted an industrial licence by the Ministry of Industry, Government of India for substantial expansion of the installed capacity by 5 lakh tonnes (from 4 lakh tonnes to 9 lakh tonnes) to manufacture portland cement on the basis of maximum utilisation of plant and mac...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Weikfield Products Co. (i) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-04-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC433Tri(Delhi)
1. These two appeals are filed by the Revenue and the issue involved in appeal No. 121/86-A is inter linked and connected with the main issue in appeal No. 2113/85-A, hence both are clubbed together and are disposed of by this common order.2. The respondents M/s. Weikfield Products Co. (India) Pvt. Ltd., are manufacturers of Prepared and Preserved Foods which fall under Tariff Item Nos. 1A and 1B of Central Excise Tariff. During the relevant period their pattern of sales in the course of wholesale trade through different channels was in the following order viz., (i) Distributor CMO 70%, (ii) Canteen Stores Department - 20%, and (iii) Exports 10%. They submitted price list in part IV from time to time in respect of their major sales i.e., through M/s. Weikfield Central Marketing Organisation claiming trade discount of 20% for goods sold in consumer packs and 17% for goods in bulk packs. The said pattern of sales and price lists were approved by the Department. The Superintendent, Centr...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Sulphur Refinery Private Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-04-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC213Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Sulphur Refinery Private Ltd., Bombay, the respondents to this appeal, are engaged in the manufacture of silicone products and emulsions. Classification List No. 1/82 classifying the goods under Item 68 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (the Schedule is referred to hereinafter as the 'CET' and the Central Excises & Salt Act as the 'Act' for brevity's sake), was provisionally approved by the Assistant Collector on 27-4-1982. By order dated 23-8-1982, the Assistant Collector finally classified the goods under Item 15A(1), CET. However, the respondents continued to clear the goods on payment of duty under Item 68 till 10-9-1982. Thereupon, the Superintendent of the concerned Range issued a show cause notice for a sum of Rs. 3,79,486.77 being the differential amount of duty for the clearances effected from 1-3-1982 to 10-9-1982. In due course, the Assistant Collector, by order dated 10-5-1984, confirmed the demand and imposed a penalty of Rs. 15...
Mrs. Elizebeth Mathew and Others, Appellants Vs. Shri Yasdev and Delhi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-04-1989
Reported in: I(1990)ACC11; 1990ACJ461; AIR1990Delhi121; 1990(18)DRJ123
1. This appeal is filed against an award granted by the Tribunal on 1 st December, 1979 for a sum of Rs. 65,510/- with costs of the proceedings. The appellants Nos. 1 and 2 are the widow and daughter while appellants Nos. 3 and 4 are the father and, mother respectively of the deceased Thomas Mathew. By this appeal the appellants pray for the enhancement of the compensation to Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees twenty lacs).2. The deceased Thomas Mathew was going on his Scooter No. DHW-2222 on 22nd February, 1974 from Ring Road towards S. N. Depot side on M-Avenue Road on the correct side of the road at about 10.30 a.m. A D.T.C. bus bearing No. DLP-1072 - driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1 came from the opposite direction, i.e. from S. N. Depot side, at a very fast speed and dashed against the scooter of the deceased by coming to the right side of the road. He fell down from the scooter, received injuries and died on the spot.3. I have heard Shri Yogesh Malhotra, counsel for the app...
Mohd. Shamim Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-04-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2521
1. This appeal has been brought against judgment dated January 12, 1989 of an Additional Session Judge, New Delhi by which he has convicted the appellant of offence punishable under Sections 18 and 21 N.D.P.S. Act and against the subsequent order dated January 16, 1989 by which the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of rupees one lac and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that PW 6 Rajinder Bakshi, Sub Inspector who was then in charge of Police Post Amar Colony on May 21, 1987 was said to be patrolling the area, accompanied by constables Jeet Ram, Lal Wahid Khan, Kishan Kumar, Roshan Lal and Govind Ram; and at about 5.30 p.m. when they reached near C-Block Market, East of Kailash that he received a secret information to the effect that two persons having opium and charas in their possession would be coming from the Village Garhi side and would b...
Brahma Nand Gupta Vs. Delhi Administration and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-04-1989
Reported in: 41(1990)DLT212
B.N. Kirpal, J.(1) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner is seeking an appropriate Writ for quashing the Notification No. F. 1/PS/HS/ 87-1227-1244 to 1433dated 2/02/1987 by virtue of which the Lt. Governor,Delhi, appointed Mr. Justice M. L. Jain (retd.) (respondent No. 4) and Mr. A. K. Baneqee (Respondent No. 5) as a Committee, inter alia, to monitor the investigation of criminal cases relating to criminal offences which had been committed during the riots which had' taken place after 31/10/1984.(2) Briefly stated, the facts are that Smt. Indira Gandhi wasassassinated' on the morning of 31/10/1984 at her residence at New Delhi. The news of her death was released in the evening and it is alleged by the petitioner that, in consequence of the assassination, riots took place in Delhi between 31/10/1984 and 3/11/1984. During the said riots there was loss to life and property.(3) In an effort to bring to an end the disturbances in Punjab, and for the sake of s...
Elizabeth Mathew and ors. Vs. Vasdev and Delhi Transport Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-04-1989
Reported in: ILR1989Delhi523
R.L. Gupta, J.(1) This appeal is filed against an award granted by the Tribunal on 1st December, 1979 for a sum of Rs. 65,510.00 with costs of the proceedings. The appellant Nos. 1 arid 2 are the widow and daughter while appellant Nos. 3 and 4 are the lather and mother respectively of the deceased Thomas Mathew. By this appeal the appellants pray for the enhancement of the compensation of Rs. 20,00,000.00 (Rupees twenty lakhs).(2) The deceased Thomas Mathe,w was going on his Scooter No. DHW-2222 on 22nd February, 1974 from Ring Road towards S.N. Depot side on M-Avenue Road on the correct side of the road at about 10.30 A.M. A D.T.C. bus bearing No. DLP-1072 driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1 came from the opposite direction, i.e., from S.N Depot side, at a very fast speed and dashed against the scooter of the deceased by coming to the right side of the road. He fell down from the scooter, received injuries and died on the spot,(3) I have heard Shri Yogesh Malhotra, couns...
M.A. Jackson Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-1989
Reported in: (1993)(65)ELT292TriDel
1. The applicant's ROM application No. C/ROM/7/89-A was listed for hearing before the Special Bench 'A' of this Tribunal on 28-4-1989.Although a notice was issued by the Registry addressed to the applicant as well as to her advocate for hearing of the ROM application posted for 28-4-1989, none appeared on behalf of the applicant. The Tribunal, therefore, after hearing the learned SDR, passed an ex parte order dismissing the ROM application on merits. In the present Misc.Application, Shri A.K. Jain, learned advocate for the applicant has stated that he could not reach the Court of this Tribunal at 10.15 A.M.for being involved in a minor car accident near Dhaula Kuan and therefore was late in reaching the Court room by forty minutes. It is also stated that on reaching the Court he was informed that the Bench had already passed an ex parte order on the ROM application. In the Misc. Application, now filed by the learned advocate, he has prayed for setting aside the Tribunal's ex parte ord...
Rajasthan Mining and Allied Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-1989
Reported in: (1990)(31)LC448Tri(Delhi)
1. Shri B.B. Gujral, the learned advocate appearing for the applicants urges waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 3.54.198/- and penalty of Rs. 50.000/- imposed by the adjudicating authority in the impugned order. He submits that he has a strong prima facie case. Barring a small clerical mistake in the reading of thickness of marble slabs by taking them into centimetres instead of inches in respect of one of the consignments checked in transit, the duly amount on which is hardly a few hundred rupees, the department's case that the thickness of all the marble slabs cleared so far by the applicants was in fact in inches whereas they were shown in centimetres in incorrect and without any basis. Except the aforesaid evidence of a single mistake, being purely of the nature of human error there is no other evidence brought on record in the impugned order. Such important pleas that the width of the machine in which marble slabs are cut is either more than 65 inches, the number of slabs cut o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »