Delhi Court December 1990 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.
Shaffi Mohd. Vs. State (Delhi Administration)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1990
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT366
Santosh Duggal, J. (1) This revision petition was filed after petitioner's appeal against the judgment of conviction under section 325 Indian Penal Code and sentence was dismissed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, New Delhi. (2) I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and gone through the records including the judgments of the two courts below. I find that the trial court had examined the injured and one of the eye witness besides the investigating officer who proved the sketch plan, other recoveries and registration of the case. I The defense of the accused has been rejected on appreciation of evidence and I do -not find any infirmity in the judgment of the trial court as it is based on evidence produced before him. The learned appellate court has endorsed this finding and there is thus a concurrent finding of facts by the two courts below. (3) On being asked as to what could be the point of law as result of which revision petition was now being heard, Mr. Mehta stated that the medical...
New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Veena Aggarwal and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1990
Reported in: I(1991)ACC359; 1991ACJ856; 43(1991)DLT372
S.N. Sapra, J.(1) Briefly stated, the facts are that, on April 1,1986, deceased Dr. Rajinder Kumar Aggarwal, was going on his scooter No. Dei 5737, after meeting his in-laws, from Rouz Avenue, New Delhi, to his house in Krishan Nagar, Delhi. Around 6 P.M., when the deceased had reached near, Ramesh Park, Pusta Road, Shakarpur, a tempo, having registration No. Dhl 8938, which was being driven by Subhash Chand, respondent no. 4 herein, rashly, recklessly and negligently, came from the opposite side and hit the scooter of the deceased and, as well as, the deceased. The tempo, not only hit the deceased, but also, hit two scooters, which were ahead of the scooter of the deceased, with the result, that the persons, driving both the scooters lost control. Due to the sudden impact of the tempo and the two scooters, the deceased fell down on the road, along with his scooter, and received injuries on head and body. This resulted in the death of Dr. Rajinder Kumar Aggarwal, just after four hours ...
Kiran Sharma Vs. Shardha Nand Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1990
Reported in: 44(1991)DLT90; I(1991)DMC402
Arun Kumar, J.(1) This is wife's appeal against the judgment dated 8th February 1985 of a Learned Single Judge of this Court whereby the husband's appeal against the judgment of the trial Judge, dated 26th September, 1983 dismissing his petition had been accepted. The husband has been hereinafter referred to as the petitioner while the wife has been referred to as the respondent. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under : (2) The parties come from orthodox Brahmin families having rural background. The father of the petitioner, Shradhanand Sharma, was a small time Vaidya in the village. The parties were married on 13th May, 1970 at Village Bhains Rawli, Distt. Gurgaon. At the time of his marriage, Shradhanand Sharma was studying for his B.Sc. in Delhi at the Delhi College of Engineering while his wife, Kiran was a non-matriculate. The petitioner completed his studies in or about June 1971. Thereafter, he was looking for a suit- able job and ultimately he was appointed as...
Reliable Laboratories P. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Delhi Development Authority ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1990
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT312
V.B. Bansal, J. (1) By way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have prayed that the order dated 4th December, 1986 mentioned in the letter dated 18th December, 1986 issued by Deputy Director (Industrial), Delhi Development Authority be quashed and that the writ of mandamus may be issued directing the respondents to hand over possession of plot No. 88/4, Block D, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase I, New Delhi. (2) Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are that the petitioner No. 2 is the managing director of the petitioner No. I which is a registered company under the Indian Companies Act. It started a small manufacturing unit in Okhla for making liquid oral formulations under license from the Drug Control, Delhi. According to the averments made in the petition industrial plot No. 88/4, Block D measuring 202.88 sq. mts. in the Okhla Industrial Area Phase I New Delhi was put for auction on 8th August, 1984. The peti...
Nehru Place Hotels Vs. Delhi Development Authority Etc
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-21-1990
Reported in: 1991RLR389
P.K. Bahri, J. (1) [ED. facts : In 1976 the plaintiff bought a large plot of land from Dda fur construction of Nehru Place Hotels. For more than 4 years its plans were not being passed on one excuse or the other and the pff. filed a W.P. in High Court which was allowed. The Dda appealed against the same which was dismissed and the D.B. decision is briefly reported at 1983. Raj L.R. 662. The detailed facts mentioned therein are not being repeated and same may be referred to. After that decision pff. applied for sanction of his plans. After lengthy correspondence, frequent meetings and repeated objections the pff. was allowed to build 2 separate blocks for commercial use and the main building of the hotel. Pff. completed the 2 blocks and repeatedly asked high and low concerned to issue the occupancy certificates in respect of the same and on failure filed W.P. in which notice was duly issued to DDA. Afterword pff. withdrew the W.P. on the ground that it intended to file a civil suit and ...
Calcutta Steel Industries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1990
Reported in: (1991)(54)ELT90TriDel
1. Out of above 164 Appeals, 10 Appeals from S.No. 154 to 163 have been filed by the Department and the issues involved in respect of 106 Appeals pertain to the period from 01-08-1983 to 29-02-1988 and the remaining 56 Appeals pertain to the period from 01-03-l988 onwards. On an identical issue, M/s. Ajanta Steel Corporation have filed an Appeal in E/Appeal No. 2784/89-B1 and the Department has also filed an Appeal against the Order of the C.C.E.(Appeals) in E/Appeal No. 2792/89-B1.All the Appeals pertain to the orders passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) in respect of classification of the products of Iron and Steel as per the Tariff prevailing during the relevant periods. The issues involved in all the appeals being common are taken up for issue of a consolidated common order.2. During the period from 01-08-1983 to 27-02-1986, the Tariff Item 25 covered Iron and Steel, and products thereof, definitions of the various products among others, viz. Hoops, Strips, Flats an...
Punjab Laminates Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1990
Reported in: (1992)(38)LC473Tri(Delhi)
1. On hearing the learned Counsel Shri N.I. Mehta, and the learned Departmental Representative, Shri Narasimhamurthy, the Miscellaneous application is allowed and stay granted because it is found that the appeal itself requires to be remanded for failure on the part of the authorities to comply with the principles of natural justice. Taking up the appeal, it is seen that the facts briefly are that the appellants manufacture laminated sheets. On 12.11.1988, the Departmental Officers visited their factory and found on verification of records certain shortage in A grade laminated sheet in the finishing room and excess in 'A', 'B' and 'C' grades. The goods found in excess were seized for action under Central Excise Rules. In a letter dated 22.11.1988, Shri Bhupinder Singh, the Managing Director, admitted that the stock of laminated sheets seized on 12.11.1988 had been sorted and placed grade-wise and that the records resumed were those maintained by them.The scrutiny of records revealed, ...
Espi Industries and Chemicals Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1990
Reported in: (1991)LC444Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants have challenged the imposition of duty amount of Rs. 9,18,443.78 and penalty of Rs. one lakh by confirmation of demand made in Show Cause Notice dated 19-2-1988 issued by Asstt. Collector of Central Excise (Anti-Evasion) alleging contravention of the provisions of Rules 9(1), 173B and 173F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and the duty demand having been confirmed under the provisions of Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 11A of Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and penalty under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The proceedings were conducted before the Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad, who confirmed the said demand by his order-in-original No. 2/90, dated 22-2-1990.2. The brief allegation in the Show Cause Notice, dated 19-2-1988 is that on 5-1-1988 the Assistant Collector of Central Excise (Anti-Evasion) headquarter office, Hyderabad and his staff (hereinafter referred to as "the officers") visited the appellants fa...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Mittal Metal Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1990
Reported in: (1991)(32)ECC238
1. These are departmental appeals filed against the orders of Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi.2. As common issues are involved, all the five appeals were heard together for the sake of convenience.3. The learned DR submitted that the basic legal issue involved in all these cases is whether in case of inputs which have been wholly exempted from duty albeit conditionally the benefit of modvat scheme was available to the respondents.4. It was his submission that being wholly exempt from duty under various exemption notifications such as Notification Nos. 208/83, 152/86 and 178/84 they become clearly recognisable as being non duty paid, and in fact no duty is paid by the manufacturers on these goods at the time of their clearance from the factories. Hence the onus 1 gets shifted to the assessees, desirous of claiming modvat credit, to prove that excise duty had in fact been paid on these inputs.5. As such, a proof of payment of duty was required to be adduced to avail the benefit o...
Peak Craft Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1990
Reported in: (1991)(53)ELT122TriDel
1. The brief facts of the matter, which has come up before us for the second time, are that the appellants imported two consignments of measuring instruments under bills of entry Nos. 8265 & 8263 dated 28-1-88 and declared values of Rs. 1,05,455 and Rs. 65, 853 respectively. After some investigations the Collector of Customs adjudicated the matter ordering enhancement of the value of the two consignments to Rs. 1,22,885 and Rs. 1,09,598/- respectively, confiscating the goods for violation of Sections 111(d) and (m) of the Customs Act but with an option for redemption for Rs. 1 lakh and imposing a penalty of Rs. 25,000/-. Hence this appeal.2. Shri A.K. Jain, the learned Advocate submitted that the Department relied on the statements of Shri Ketan Dalai who was supposed to sell the imported goods to the actual users, and of others. He submitted that inspite of requests made, the cross examination of the witnesses was not allowed and, therefore, the proceedings are ab-initio void, th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »