Delhi Court August 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.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Bimla Ahuja and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-1989
Reported in: ILR1989Delhi316
Malik, J. (1) While a (2) Now adverting to the facts, it may be stated that on 12th of December 1973 at about 11.45 a.m. one Om Prakash Ahuja who was traveling on a motor cycle was crushed to death by the fending vehicle bus No. Dlp 5096. Consequently, a petition under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 was filed before the Tribunal and the Tribunal by its order dated 16th of July 1980 made an award for a sum of Rs. 1,04,940.00 in favor of the petitioners in the claim petition and further directed that interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of the final realisation of the awarded amount shall be paid. (3) The point before me for consideration is very short. I may at this stage, however, point out that Mr. Goyal did not deny me the assistance even though he maintains that Shri Sardari Lal Bhatia, senior counsel, was appearing for the claimants and that the brief has been withdrawn from him by the respondents. Mr. Goy...
Richardson Vicks Ind. and anr. Vs. Vikas Pharmaceuticals
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)ARBLR381(Delhi); 40(1990)DLT194; 1989(17)DRJ340
S.N. Sapra, J. (1) Along with suit, for perpetual injunction for infringement of trade mark and copyright, plaintiff filed an application, being I.A. No. 4138 of 1985, under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, thereby claiming the following temporary inju.nction : 'IT is humbly prayed that pending the hearing and final disposal of this suit. the defendants themselves, there servants, agents, stockists and all other persons on their behalf be restrained from using and infringing mark in relation to any vaporising ointment or any other preparation, the trade mark VlKAS's Pacorub, bottles and metal containers as per annexures 'E' and 'F' which is in infringement of the plaintiffs registered trade marks Nos. 328354, 328355 and 267167. The defendants may be further restrained from passing off and enabling others to pass off their vaporising ointment or other product in bottles and metal containers annexures 'E' and 'F' as and for that of the plaintiffs or i...
S. Balwinder Singh @ Chhinda Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-1989
Reported in: 39(1989)DLT436
Santosh Duggal, J. (1) The detenu, in this writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, was detained by virtue of an order oi detention passed on 9th March, 1988 by Shri K. L. Verma, Joint secretary to the Government of India, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3(1) of the Conservation of foreign Exchange and prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (in short Cofeposa ACT'). (2) In the writ petition, filed through an Uncle, diverse grounds were taken, and some of them argued also, but the plea which has been pressed utmost during arguments, rather exclusively, is to the effect that the detention of the petitioner stands vitiated for the reason that a representation made by him on 11th April, 1988 was considered, and rejected by the officer, namely, the Joint Secretary above-named, who had passed the detention order, at his own level being an officer empowered under Section 3 of the Act. This plea is taken specifically in ground No. Xxi, of the additional ...
Pradeep Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-21-1989
Reported in: 39(1989)DLT456
Santosh Duggal, J.(1) In this appeal, the appellant challenges his conviction for offences under section 21 of the Narcotic Drug & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short Ndps Act) as well as section 20 Part Ii of the aforesaid Act, recorded by judgment dated 30th May, 1987 as also order of sentence passed separately on 2nd June, 1987 whereby he was awarded rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also a sentence of fine of Rs. 1,00,000; sentence in default being further imprisonment for two years. (2) As per prosecution case. on secret information having been received by Ast Om Parkash of Crime Branch (Public Witness .7), on 2nd May 1986 to the effect that a man named Kaka along with one Pradip was dealing in charas and that they were likely to carry the said commodity to Gole Market that day. the said Asi Om Prakash together with Si Surinder Singh (PW6), and four constables formed a raiding party under the supervision of Inspector Shamsher Singh (Public Witness 5j and picketed ne...
Vaidyaratnam P.S. Varier's Arya Vaidyasala Kottakkal Vs. K.C. Vijaikum ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-19-1989
Reported in: ILR1990Delhi124
P.N. Nag, J. (1) This is a suit for recovery of possession of the premises described in schedule attached to the plaint and also for payment of damages amounting to Rs. 1,96,000.00 together with future damages for use and occupation of the premises @ Rs. 100.00 per day from the date of suit till the plaintiff gets actual possession of the premises.(2) The suit is grounded on the allegations that the plaintiff is the Managing Trustee of Arya Vaidyasala, Kittakkal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Vaidyasala'), a charitable trust, and is competent to file the suit. The defendant is residing on the second floor of building, E-76, South Extension Part I, New Delhi belonging to Vaidyasala in which the plaintiff is also running its Medical Centre at New Delhi. In fact this Medical Centre of the plaintiff at New Delhi was started in February, 1982 and with a view to establishing necessary contracts with the Govt. Departments, Foreign Embassies, visiting dignitaries of foreign countries etc. an...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Apar (P) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-18-1989
Reported in: (1989)(25)LC16Tri(Delhi)
50. The electrodes manufactured by them are first put into polythene bags, which are in turn put into the cardboard cartons. The cardboard cartons are then put into polythene bags. They included the cost of packing upto this stage in the price-list. These cartons in turn are packed into wooden boxes which are nailed or stripped with iron strips in order to protect the goods from damage in transit. The appellant claimed deduction of the cost of wooden packing. The Asstt. Collector disallowed the claim. The appeal to the Collector was allowed. Hence the Government of India issued a notice under Section 36(2) proposing to revise the order of the Collector.2. The SDR Shri Krishnamurthy contended that the packing in wooden boxes which are. nailed and stripped with iron strips are essential for the purpose of delivery at the factory gate, and therefore, they are includible in the assessable value. He distinguished the decision of the Supreme Court in Godfrey Phillips on the ground that ther...
Amrit Chemicals Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-18-1989
Reported in: (1990)(25)ECC68
1. This appeal is directed against order-in-original No.3/Addl.Collector/1986, dated 26-8-1986 passed by the Additional Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad whereby he demanded from the appellants a sum of Rs.1,16,212.22 being the duty leviable on recovered caustic soda and imposed on them a penalty of Rs. 30,000/-.2. The facts of the case, briefly, stated are that the appellants were engaged in "manufacture" (as the Revenue would put it) or "recovery" (as the appellants would put it) of caustic soda from spent caustic soda lye. The Superintendent of Central Excise who along with his officers visited the factory of the appellants on 25-1-1985 and 30-1- 1985 found on scrutiny of the factory records that the appellants were undertaking concentration of caustic soda liquor from spent caustic soda lye received from textile mills and returning the same after process to the Mills under their delivery slips. On fruther scrutiny, the Supdt. noticed that the appellants had received spent cau...
Moti Ram and Others Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-18-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ337
Charanjit Talwar, J.1. This is an unusual case. During its investigation, the prosecuting agency arrested two sets of persons unconnected with each other for the murder of Baij Nath. The crime is alleged to have taken place at F. 65, Shastri Nagar, Delhi at about 9.30 p.m. on 7th July, 1983. There were two different versions which were unearthed during investigation; one was that the appellants herein i.e., Moti Ram, Ashok Kumar and Ram Swarup had committed that murder and the other was that Mahabir, Chetan, Des Raj, Jagdish, Ashok, Sudesh Kumar and Prem Chand had committed the same. The motive for committing the crime of one set i.e. the appellants was found to be different from the motive of the other set. The last mentioned persons have been shown in Column 2 of report under S. 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure implying thereby that they were not being sent for trial. The Investigating Officer in his testimony admitted that the said persons had been named as the accused in this ...
Des Raj Malhotra Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-18-1989
Reported in: ILR1989Delhi576
R.L. Gupta, J. (1) This petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeks quashing of the order of detention No. F. No. 673/154/89-Cus. Viii dated 7th April, 1989 passed by Sh. A. K. Batabyal, Joint Secretary to the Government or India, specially empowered under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (as amended) (COFEPOSA for short). (2) On 5-5-1988, there was a search of the residential premises at 1-208, Ashok Vihar Phase-I, Delhi in occupation of one Shri B. K. Talwar in which along with other things particulars of the present detenu like his telephone number etc. were recovered. On that basis his premises E-144, Kamla Nagar, Delhi occupied by the petitioner was searched on 20-1-1989 resulting in the seizure of documents and foreign currency. Besides being prosecuted under various criminal provisions, the impugned order of detention was also pas...
Kohinoor Woollen Mills Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-17-1989
Reported in: (1989)(24)ECC61
1. The issue involved is whether the goods imported are 'Woollen Waste' or otherwise.2. The appellants, M/s. Kohinoor Woollen Mills, Ludhiana had imported 6 bales of Wool Waste as per declaration in the Bill of Entry and sought clearance through Bombay port under REP Licence transferred to them and claimed duty exemption under Notification No. 240-Cus., dated 2-8-1976 which is for exempting woollen waste and woollen rags.3. The goods were examined on 7-1-1985, 17-7-1985 and subsequently on 5-2-1986 and the Dy. Collector who is the adjudicating authority in his findings had indicated that on examination it was found on the whole to consist predominantly of cut silvers in running length from 10 to 25 metres which are parallely laid in even thickness, that they are nothing but pieces of wool tops which cannot be said to have arisen during the process of manufacturing yarn, and concluded that these are easily segregable and in running length. He also referred to the high price of the wool...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »