Delhi Court February 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.
The National thermal Power Corporation Ltd. Vs. the Singer Co. and ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)ARBLR313(Delhi); 44(1991)DLT122; ILR1991Delhi452
B.N. Kirpal, J. (1) The question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the provisions of the .Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'the ArbitrationAct) are applicable to an interim award made at London by an Arbitral Tribunal constituted by I.C.C Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce, Paris.(2) Briefly stated, the facts are that vide two letters dated 14/02/1981 the appellant had accepted the proposal of and had awarded contracts to the respondent. This was followed by the parties executing two formal agreements, inwriting, on 17/08/1982. The first agreement was, interalia, to design, manufacture, test and effect supplies of equipment and materials for a computer based training simulator while by the second agreement the respondent was to do the work of clearance and handling at Indian Port, transportation and handling at project site, storage, erection, testing and) commissioning and line tuning of the said training simula...
Sidha Nand Shastri and ors. Vs. Delhi Administration and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT454
C.M. Nayar, J.(1) The learned Counsel are agreed that the matter can be disposed of finally today and in view of the counter affidavit of the respondents 1 to 3, no further question survives for the consideration of this Court. In view of this, I proceed to dispose of the writ petition. (2) The present petition is directed against the respondents 1 to 3 for according approval to the list of joint seniority submitted to them by respondents 4 and 5 on May 20, 1988, in pursuance to the judgment of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 389 of 1979. A further prayer is made that the respondents be directed to place the petitioners in Selection Grade from the date of their entitlement and to direct them to pay the arrears of Selection Grade with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum to the petitioners from the date of their entitlement, till the actual payment is made. (3) Respondents 1 to 3 have now filed the counter affidavit, In which they have not denied the averments as made in ...
Ramesh Kumar Bhndoola Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-1991
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT584
V.B. Bansal, J.(1) Holding him guilty under Sec. 7 read with Sec. 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), Ramesh Kumar Bhandoola s/o Shri K.L. Bhandoola, was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months with a fine of Rs. 1000.00 or in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months by a Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi vide judgment/order dated 5th July, 1977. His appeal against conviction and sentence aforesaid was dismissed by an Addl Sessions Judge, New Delhi on 22nd September, 1978. (2) Still being unsatisfied from the decisions of the two courts holding him guilty, Ramesh Kumar Bhandoola has filed this Revision Petition. (3) The facts leading to the filing of this revision petition are short and can be described briefly. The petitioner was carrying on business under the name of Soverign Departmental Stores Keventer's .Lane, Sardar Patel, Marg, New Delhi. On 13th August, 1975, Food Ins...
Eugna D'Silva Vs. Ganju Ram and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-1991
Reported in: I(1991)ACC538; 44(1991)DLT25a
R.L. Gupta, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 23.10.79 of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi by which the claim petition was dismissed without any order as to costs.2. The facts out of which this accident claim arose are that deceased Mrs. Mary Lobo Noronha, mother of the appellant on 17.12.70 at about 9.15 A.M. was crossing the road in front of King Adward Park, Delhi. When she had already crossed almost the entire road from the Red Fort side towards the middle of Patri, car No. DLJ 3701 alleged to be driven by respondent 1, Ganju Ram rashly and negligently came from Chandni Chowk side at a fast speed and struck against the deceased. It was further the case in the petition that the speed of the offending vehicle was so high that the respondent I, Ganju Ram could not control the vehicle and thus caused the accident. The deceased was removed to Irwin Hospital in an unconscious state, where she succumbed to her injuries within 48 hours without rega...
Mrs. Elizebeth Mathew and ors. Vs. Vasdev and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-1991
Reported in: I(1991)ACC559
R.L. Gupta, J.1. This application has been filed for review of an order dated 4.10.89 by which this Court enhanced the compensation amount to Rs. 2, 68, 800/- from Rs. 65, 510/- as awarded by the Motor Claims Accident Tribunal. The appeal was actually heard in the absence of learned Counsel for the Insurance Company because nobody appeared on behalf of the Insurance Company. thereforee, in the interest of justice the arguments have practically been reheard to find out whether actually there is any error in the aforesaid judgment.2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The arguments are mainly addressed on the point of the monthly dependency available to the legal representatives of the deceased Thomas Mathew and the multiplier applied by the Learned Tribunal. On the point of monthly dependency, learned Counsel for the respondent has drawn my attention to the statement of some of the witnesses. PW-3 is the wife of the deceased. In her examination-in-chief she deposed that t...
C.L. Wool Company Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-11-1991
Reported in: (1991)LC226Tri(Delhi)
1. This is a stay application filed with reference to the order in appeal passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) by his order dated 24-9-1990, 2. The learned counsel stated that they had filed licence bond to produce a valid licence after clearance. However, the licences could not be produced subsequently as the same had been lost earlier by the department.3. It was their submission that the Assistant Collector has passed the order after issuing the show cause notice but without hearing them. He has passed the order exparte without waiting for the reply to the show cause notice even before the expiry of time allowed.4. They had brought this to the notice of the Collector (Appeals). In spite of it he has rejected the appeal. In the circumstances he would pray for waiver of pre-deposit of the amount in question.6. In response to a question from the Bench with reference to the 'facts of the case' as mentioned in the first paragraph of the order in original the learned counsel state...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Mahila Udyok Sahakara Sanga
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-11-1991
Reported in: (1992)(38)LC228Tri(Delhi)
1. The above mentioned two appeals relate to identical issues and are taken up for issue of a common order.2. The appeal No. 2 is against the order of Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), in order-in-appeal No. 96/84(B), dated 30.5.1984. The facts arising in this appeal are that the respondents are engaged in assembling of telephone items and components falling under Tariff Item-68 received from M/s Indian Telephone Industries Limited and after assembly, they return the same to the supplier. They claimed exemption under Notification 119/75 CE duty. Against the order of the Assistant Collector, disallowing the exemption under Notification 119/75, the respondents appealed to the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), who has allowed them the benefit of the Notification, and Revenue has come in appeal before us.3. Briefly stating the facts, the appellants contend raw materials like Terminal Block, Ringer Assembly, Induction Coil, Handsets, Case & Stand Bracket, were received by the...
Pushpa Singh Vs. Gajeender Pal Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-11-1991
Reported in: 44(1991)DLT22; I(1991)DMC540; 1991(1)DRJ(Suppl)442
R.L. Gupta, J. (1) This revision petition is directed against an order dated 27th November, 1990 of the Learned Additional District Judge, Delhi, by which she dismissed Hma petition No. 131/90 of the respondent/husband in default of his appearance. Normally she petitioner wife should have been satisfied by the dismissal of a divorce petition by her husband. But still this petition seems to have been filed in view of peculiar ciroumstances. The first circumstances is that the wife had moved an application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amending her written statement with the idea of converting it into a counter-claim under Section 23-A of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking divorce from the husband on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. She had also moved an application under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for filing a complaint against the husband for various offences alleged to have been committed by him during the course of the proceedings. The ...
D.C. Bhatia and ors. Vs. Union of India, Etc
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-11-1991
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT425; 1991RLR201
M.C. Jain, J.(1) This bunch of writ petitions mentioned in the schedule annexed to this judgment (Not printed--Ed.) raises a common question regarding the constitutional validity of Section 3(c) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958(2) For appreciating the controversy raised in these writ petitions, it would be appropriate that the history of rent control legislation is taken into account. Before enacting the rent control laws, the relations of the landlords and the tenants were governed by the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act. That was the general law applicable to landlords and tenants but on account of scarcity of accommodation i.e. shortage of housing accommodation. Rent control legislation came into being. So far as Delhi is concerned, under rule 21 of the defense of India Rules, New Delhi House Rent Control Order, 1939 was issued. Its application was extended to Municipality of New Delhi and to the notified area of Civil Station, Delhi, Rule 81(2) (bb) empowered the Centr...
Manipal Power Press Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-08-1991
Reported in: (1991)LC301Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Manipal Power Press have filed the instant appeal being aggrieved with the order No. M. CUS 1436/89, dated 11-8-1989 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras.2. The appellants imported Dampening Sleeves made of plastics and the goods were assessed to customs duty under Heading 3926.90 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 ('the Schedule' for short).After clearance of the goods on payment of the duty so assessed, the appellant sought reassessment in terms of Customs Notification No.69/87, dated 1-3-1987 and consequential refund. The claim was rejected as inadmissible by the Assistant Collector and this order was upheld by the Collector (Appeals) whose order is now under challenge before us.3. We have heard Shri K.V. Kunhikrishnan, Consultant, for the appellants and 1991 (56) E.L.T. 556 (Tribunal) Shri L. Narasimhamurthy, DR, for the respondent-Collector.4. Shri Kunhikrlshnan's submission is that the subject goods are parts of printing machines and ar...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »