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.
Laxmi Vijay Brass and Iron Works Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1991
Reported in: (1991)(56)ELT565TriDel
1. By the present rectification of mistake application filed in terms of provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 35C of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, the applicants have made a prayer for the rectification of the mistake by reopening of the order No. 53/90-B1 dated 30th April, 1990. A notice of hearing dated 26th November; 1990 was sent per registered A.D. post listing the matter for hearing today.The applicants by their letter dated 18th November, 1990 received in the Registry on 23rd November, 1990 have made a prayer for the decision on merits. Accordingly, we proceed to decide the same.2. Shri R.M. Ramchandani, the learned SDR has appeared on behalf of the respondent. Shri Ramchandani, the learned SDR stated that the Bench had passed a reasoned order and as such, the present application should be dismissed.3. We have perused the records. The applicants had written a letter dated 28th February, 1990 which was received in the Registry on 5th March, 1990. With the letter th...
Virsa Singh Vs. State Through Cbi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ164
ORDER1. Virsa Singh has by way of this petition prayed for being released on bail for the offence under Ss. 302/307/34/120-B IPC and Ss. 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. This is a case in respect of an incident dated 28th March, 1984 in which Shri Harbans Singh Manchanda and two other persons sustained injuries. Aforesaid Harbans Singh Manchanda died as a result of the injuries sustained by him in this incident on the next day. 3. To start with case FIR 10/84 was registered in Police Station Tilak Marg under S. 307 read with S. 34, IPC when no one was named as an accused. The investigation was subsequently transferred to the C.B.I. where case RC-3/84-STU. III/CBI/SPE, New Delhi was registered. The petitioner and one Gurinder Singh were arrested and a challan against them was filed in the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi in December, 1985. Subsequently, in July, 1986 a supplementary challan was filed against the petitioner, Gurinder Singh and one Amarjit Singh for offences...
Trishul Impex Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1991
Reported in: 1991(32)ECC342; 1992(58)ELT182(Del); ILR1991Delhi443
M.C. Jain, J.(1) Heard counsel for the parties. This court by order dated November 12, 1990, allowed the petition and directed respondents 1 to 5 to release the goods without payment of demurrage charges in favor of the petitioner and also to issue a Detention Certificate in respect of these goods from February 27, 1988 when the Bill of Entries were filed until the date of actual clearance.(2) Respondent No. 5 has now filed this C. M. 468/91 in which a declaration is sought that the liability of any demurrage charges and ground rent charges will have to be borne by the petitioner. The petitioner's case is that in all 71 cartons were imported and the Bill of Entries were presented on February 27. 1988 and thereafter the Customs authorities instituted an inquiry and a show cause notice was issued on December 15, 1988. Ultimately however, by order dated March 15, 1990 the Assistant Collector Customs discharged the said show cause notice. The petitioner's case is that when the show cause n...
Master Builders and anr. Vs. United States of America
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1991
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT719
M.C. Jain, J. (1) This appeal is preferred against the order dated 7th February 1991 passed on the application filed under Order 39 Rules I and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for restraining the defendant by means of an ad interim injunction from resisting and obstructing the entry of the plaintiff in property No. 16. Amrita Shergill Marg. New Delhi and also restraining the defendant from entering upon the same. The learned Judge granted the plaintiff's application and the defendants were directed to remove themselves from the property in question during the pendency of the suit and were further restrained from resisting or obstructing entry of the plaintiff of any of the officers or others all on behalf thereto. The learned Judge also gave some directions as to how the order passed on the application is to come into effect. The directions given by the learned Judge are as under ;- '(1) This order will become effective from February 18, 1991, 12.00 noon; (2) Pla...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Bhoop Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1991
Reported in: I(1991)ACC493; 43(1991)DLT502
R.L. Gupta, J. (1) This appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company against the judgment dated 18th November, 1988 of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal by which he awarded Rs. l,60,000.00 to respondent No. 4. He also awarded interest at the rate of 12/o per annum on the amount of Rs. 90.000.00 awarded as special damages in this case to the respondent from the date of the petition. (2) The brief facts from which this claim petition arose are that on 18th March, 1982 at about 10.15 Am respondent Vinod Kumar Mittal was driving his motor cycle Dex 561) on Ring Road. When he arrived near Hot Mix Plant, a truck bearing No. Dhl 7165 coming in the wrong direction from opposite side dashed against the motor cycle as a result of which respondent fell on his left side and suffered injuries. The respondent had stated that he had become crippled and sustained permanent disability due to which he could not walk normally and also could not lift weight with his hands and that he had to wal...
Sudarshan Malik Vs. Narmada Prasad Gupta and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1991
Reported in: 44(1991)DLT206; 1991(20)DRJ360
R.L. Gupta, J. (1) This revision is directed against an order dated 23-9-89 of the learned Additional Rent Controller, Delhi by which he passed an order of eviction against the tenant, respondent 2, who is the husband of the petitioner, from the premises bearing Flat No. 37, Sfs, Dda, M.B. Road (Ground and first floor) New Delhi in favor of the landlord respondent 1 and also rejected an application of the petitioner under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.(2) The brief facts leading to this revision petition arc that on 26-8-89 the landlord executed a lease agreed in favor of the tenant for letting out the- aforesaid premises to him on a monthly rent of Rs. 1400.00 . The petitioner Along with her husband came into possession of the premises on 1-9-88. The husband left the premises on 1-6-1989 and started residing in another premises. The landlord is then alleged to have filed the eviction petition under Section. 14(l)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act for eviction of respon...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Smt. Shyam Kumari and ors.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-14-1991
Reported in: (1991)(35)LC167Tri(Delhi)
1. Collector of Central Excise, North UP Collectorate of Customs, Meerut, has filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Central Board of Excise & Customs, New Delhi. In column No. 3, the date of communication of the order has been mentioned as 25th May, 1982, whereas the appeal was received in the Registry on 19th April, 1983. In terms of provision of Sub-section (3) of Section 35B of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944, the appeal has to be filed within three months from the date of the communication of the order. The appellant has filed an application for condonation of delay. Notices of hearing were sent to the appellant as well as to the respondents.Nobody has appeared cm behalf of the respondents. Shri Satish Kumar, learned JDR, has appeared on behalf of the appellant, and he has reiterated the contentions made in the application for condonation of delay. He has pleaded that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in the late filing of the appe...
Tata Engg. Locomotive Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-14-1991
Reported in: (1992)(38)ECC213
1. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd., 24, Homi Mody Street, Fort, Bombay-400 023 has filed the abve captioned 40 appeals being aggrieved from the orders passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals).Since the issue involved is common, the above captioned 40 appeals are being disposed of by this common order. For the sake of brevity, brief facts of appeal No. C/1459/86-B2 are as under :- 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that M/s. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd. had imported oil seals vide bill of entry No. AI No. 265 dated 13th April, 1983. The description in the bill of entry was given as under :- The appellant had claimed its assessment under Heading 84.65 of the old Tariff, whereas the revenue had assessed the same under Heading 87.04/06(1). The appellant had filed the refund claim and had asked for re-assessment, and in the refund claim it was stated that oil seals rings imported in the consignment were for sealing the oil leakage and preventing the dust from ent...
Chandra Wati Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-14-1991
Reported in: 44(1991)DLT31
V.B. Bansal, J. (1) In this criminal revision Smt. Chandra Wati has challenged her conviction under Section 61 of the Punjab Excise Act and the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 18 months with fine of Rs. 1000.00 or in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. (2) Vide judgment dated 9th- May, 1958, she was convicted under Section 61(l)(a) of Punjab Excise Act and was awarded the aforesaid sentences vide order dated 15th May, 1985, by the Metropolitan Magistrate. She challenged her conviction and order of sentence by way of filing an appeal which was ultimately dismissed by an Addl. Sessions Judge Delhi on 8th December, 1990. Still being aggrieved from the findings recorded by the two Courts below, she has now filed this revision petition. (3) This case relates to an incident of 10th August, 1977. The allegations of the prosecution in brief had been that on that day S.I. Gian Singh while accompanied by other officials organized a raiding party on getting a se...
Asha Khanna and anr. Vs. Vishnu Charan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-14-1991
Reported in: 1991RLR251
Mahinder Narain, J. (1) It is stated by Vishnu Charan, deft. who is present in person, that he is not in a position to lead any evidence. (2) Trial of the matter was fixed yesterday and day before and till date statements of P.W. 3 and Public Witness . 4 were recorded. Both the witnesses were cross-examined. Mr. S.P. Srivastava and Mr. Rajiv Nanda, counsel for the deft, were present. Mr. A.S. Chandhiok is also a counsel. (3) According to the record, vakalatnama was filed by Mr. I.C. Kumar, Advocate. However, Mr. A.S. Chandhiok filed the w/s on behalf of the deft, and has put in appearance on behalf of the deft. on numerous occasions starting from 1984. (4) Yesterday it was mentioned in Court that talks for compromise are on, and that the matter be adjourned. I did not accede to this request yesterday. It transpired that the case was adjourned for today in the presence of Mr. S.P. Srivastava and Mr. Rajiv Nanda. Mr. AN. Tiwari and Mr. Rajesh Banati, Advocates on behalf of the puffs. wer...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »