Delhi Court October 1991 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.
Hardyal Singh Mehta Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-1991
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT616
ORDERSand directions in certain cases:-The Tribunal may, notwithstanding any of the foregoing provisions give such orders or give such directions, as may be necessary or expedient to secure the ends of justice.'(15) The question, which arose, before A.B. Saharya, j., for determination was, as to, who ought to be the parties in the appeal, filed against an order of demolition, under Section 347-A of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act.(16) After considering the various provisions, as contained in the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, the Rules framed there under, as well as, the Civil Procedure Code, my learned brother A.B. Saharya, J. held that the Appellate Tribunal has no power to add anyone, except the Corporation and its officers or servants, as parties to an appeal, filed against the order, directing the demolition of construction, It was held:THE argument that the Tribunal has the same powers as are vested in the Court of the District Judge under Section 457 of the ^ Act is wholly mis...
Enforcement Directorate Vs. Abhey Oswal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT108; 1992(22)DRJ132
(1) After having given an undertaking in this High Court that the respondent will join investigation as and when required by the Directorate, the respondent has completely fettered the hands of the Directorate in even issuing a requisition for his appearance for purposes of investigation because in that situation because in that situation the Directorate may be guilty of violating the orders of the Punjab & Haryana High Court. Thus, I am of the view that the bail order dated 12-12-90 in favor of the respondent passed by this court should not be continued and if the respondent so desires or feels that even before the stay of the proceedings by the Punjab & Haryana High Court, he is likely to be arrested, he should approach that High Court. This High Court is not obliged to continue the operation of an order the effect of which has been nullified by the act of the respond ent. The preliminary objection, thereforee, raised on behalf of the petitioner is sustained and the aforesaid order o...
Vijay Kumar Batra Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT521
R.L. Gupta, J. (1) Petitioner who is elder brother of the husband of the deceased Poonam has applied for grant of bail. He is being prosecuted under Sections 306/304B/498A IPC read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in Fir No. 259/91 registered in Ps Hajrat Nijamuddin, New Delhi.(2) I have heard arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the parties. The case of the prosecution is based on the statement of Shri 0m Prakash, father of the deceased Poonam. He stated that he had married Poonam to Sunil about two and a half years back. The petitioner is married to his elder daughter Santosh Kumari. At the time of marriage of Poonam, her mother-in- law Kaushalya had proclaimed that they will never see the face of Poonam thereafter. He could not give much dowry in her marriage because her financial condition was not good at that time. Poonam was being continuously taunted for in-sufficiency of dowry by the petitioner and the husband Sunil. The police also recorded the statement of San...
Mahalakshmi Glass Works Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-1991
Reported in: (1993)(67)ELT183TriDel
1. The present miscellaneous application emerges from Tribunal's order No. 328 to 330/1991 dated 18-4-1991/6-6-1991. Shri R.K. Habbu, the learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the applicants. He has pleaded that the Tribunal should exercise its powers in terms of provisions of Rules 40 and 41 of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982. Shri Habbu pleaded that after the remand of the matter by the Tribunal, the Collector has issued a show cause notice and he pleaded that the Tribunal should issue certain directions to the Collector. In support of his argument, he relied on a decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Scientific Instruments Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs and another reported in 1980 (6) E.L.T. 89 (Cal.) where the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court had held that when an order is set aside by an appellate authority and is remanded back with specific direction, the power and jurisdiction of the lower authority is limited to...
Collector of Customs Vs. Ferro Alloys Corporation Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-1991
Reported in: (1992)(39)ECC40
1. In both these appeals, common question of law and facts arises and hence they are taken up together for disposal as per law.2. The Revenue has filed this appeal No. 3920/88-C against the order of Collector (Appeals) who has rejected the application filed by the Additional Collector of Customs, Visakhapatnam under Section 129D of the Customs Act, 1962 against the final assessment order passed in respect of Bill of Entry No. 010/2/6.86 covering the import of 4,675 mt. tonnes of Low Ash Metallurgical Coke (LMM Coke) imported by M/s.Ferro Alloys Corp. Ltd. The goods were cleared on assessment on PD basis pending production of documents and chemical test result. The consignment was assessed and cleared free of duty extending the benefit of Notification No. 166/80-Cus., dated 19-84980 and the Bill of Entry was assessed finally on 10-11-1986 without charging to duty. The learned Additional Collector held that the consignment should not have been granted the benefit of notification in ques...
Superintending Engineer Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-1991
Reported in: (1992)(59)ELT610TriDel
1. Both the appeals raise a common issue and are against the same order-in-original No. 13/90 dated 10-4-1990 and hence they are taken up together for disposal as per law.The appellant herein is Supdt. Engineer Jayakwadi Project Circle who has challenged the order-in-original No. 13/90 dated 10-4-1990 passed by the Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Aurangabad confirming a demand made in Show Cause Notice dated 30-4-1987 issued MR 9(2) of Central Excise Rules read with proviso to Section 11A of Central Excises and Salt Act for Rs. 13,58,105.77 in respect of goods cleared during the period 1-4-1982 to 28-2-1986 by irrigation department of Jayakwadi Project, Aurangabad and Command Area Development Authority of Govt. of Maharashtra.The appellant herein is Chief Administrator Command Area Development Authority, Aurangabad who has challenged the same Order-in-Original No.13/88 dated 29-5-1988 confirming the above noted demand.2. The show cause notice dated 29-4-1987 was issued by the...
G.R. Ambwani and ors. Vs. Anand Mohan and Sons Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-1991
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT574
S.N. Sapra, J.(1) By the present revision petition, petitioners seek to challenge the impugned order dated September 4, 1990, of the learned trial Court, whereby, it has been held that petitioners have prima facie, committed willfull disobedience of the judgment dated February 18, 1989, of the appellate Court, and have rendered themselves liable for civil contempt, under Sections 10, 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971. By the same order, all the petitioners, were ordered to be summoned for appearance before the Court. (2) For better appreciation of the contentions, raised in the case, it will be useful to refer to, in brief, the facts and circumstances of the case. (3) Property No. 1, Ram Kishore Road, Delhi, hereinafter called, the property in question, was previously known, as Woodland Hotel Building. By virtue of an award dated December 20, 1920, made by Mr. Justice Sir Abdul Rehman, the estate of Ram Chand's family was partitioned, amongst other properties. The property i...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Institute of Economic and Market Re ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-1991
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT681
B.N. Kirpal, J.(1) The petitioner is challenging the order of the Addl. District Judge, Delhi who had allowed the appeal of the respondent and directed the Additional Tax Recovery Collector to re-fix the rateable value of the property No E-2/380, Asian Games Village Complex, Siri Fort, New Delhi by applying the provisions of Section 6 of the Delhi Rent Control Act. (2) Briefly stated the facts are that the Delhi Development Authority had constructed a number of flats, commonly known as the Asian Games Village Complex at Siri Fort, New Delhi. As the name itself suggests, these flats were constructed in order to house various participants who came to take part in the Asian Games in 1982. These flats were subsequently sold either by allotment or by auction by the Delhi Development Authority. The sale took place in the present case on 26th March, 1987 and the flat in question was purchased for Rs. 7,70,000. The Additional Tax Recovery Collector purported to apply the principles laid down b...
Tansi Polish Unit Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-1991
Reported in: (1993)(67)ELT173TriDel
1. In this appeal, the appellant is aggrieved with the order of the Collector (Appeals) No. 123/87 dt. 31-7-1987 by which he has rejected the appellant's plea that their product varnish and Gloss-o-Gloss are not classifiable under Chapter Heading 3208.90 of Central Excise Tariff, 1985.2. The question that arises for our reconsideration in this appeal is the correct classification for the products picture varnish and Gloss-o-Gloss manufactured by the appellant's Tansi Polish Units at Madras. They filed a classification list No. 83/86 in respect of Gasket shellac and Anti-corrosive Black paints, picture varnish and gloss-o-gloss manufactured by them under Chapter Heading 32, 27 and 38 of CET Act, 1985. The department did not accept the classification sought by them in respect of picture varnishes and gloss-o-gloss under Heading 3208.90 attracting duty at the rate of 20% ad valorem.Therefore, the department issued a show cause notice dt. 23-1-1987 asking them to explain as to why this tw...
Asadhulla Sarwari Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-21-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT8; 1992(22)DRJ176
R.L. Gupta, J. (1) The petitioner was convicted under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act for over staying in India in House No.B-3/156, Janak Puri, New Delhi on 11.6.90 and sentenced to imprisonment already undergone in custody during trial and also to pay a fine of Rs.5000/ - or in default suffer Si for 5 months. He appealed before the learned Asj, Delhi and also applied for suspension of the sentence,. The appellate Court was of the view that the amount of fine being not very heavy did not warrant suspension. (2) This petition has been filed under Section 482 read with Section 439 of the, Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the aforesaid order and releasing the petitioner on bail. (3) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the relevant provisions. It may be noted that in this case the petitioner was sentenced to imprisonment already undergone. thereforee, in essence there is no substantive sentence of imprisonment which is required to be suspended. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »