Delhi Court March 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.
Collector of Customs Vs. Nippon Bearings (P) Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: (1991)LC587Tri(Delhi)
1. These 4 appeals are disposed of by a common order as issue involved is common to all the appeals. The respondents in appeal No. C/3339/88-A which arises out of an order in SS/10-53/87 dated 20th March, 1987 of the Collector, imported one consignment of 'Ball Bearings' No. 2307, 2313, 2313K of Hungarian origin from M/s. Mak Automobile Co., London, (U.K.). The goods were shipped directly by M/s. Metal Impex Budapex, Hungary. Bill of Entry No. 3065/210, dated 6th January, 1987 was filed. A show cause notice dated 11th March, 1987 was issued to the importers proposing to enhance the value from 0.90 US $, 2.15 US $ to 2.45 U S $ and 8.11 US $ respectively. It is also proposed to confiscate the goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. The proceedings were initiated on the basis of Hungarian manufacturers' price list No. 830228 issued in 1983. On receipt of the reply the Collector accepted the invoice price of the bearings and dropped the proceedings against which the appeal i...
Hyderabad Plywood Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: (1991)(55)ELT62TriDel
1. The appellants have been manufacturing plywood and plywood products including Block Boards and Flush Doors classifiable under Item 16B of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. They had been declaring Flush Doors in their classification lists as chargeable to duty under the aforesaid tariff item and these lists were approved from time to time by the jurisdictional Assistant Collector of Central Excise. The appellants continued to pay duty under Tariff Item 16B until sometimes in September 1980 when they filed Writ Petition No. 4826 of 1980 in the Andhra Pradesh High Court challenging the levy of duty on Flush Doors and praying for refund of Rs. 10,93,969.32 which they claimed to be the duty which they had paid during the period 1972-73 to 30th September, 1980 on flush doors. By an interim order in Miscellaneous Petition No.7262 of 1980, the High Court directed on 30th September, 1980, the respondents not to collect the excise duty provided the petitioner furnishes bank guarantee for ...
Raghunath Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: 44(1991)DLT631; 1991(20)DRJ367
S.C. Jain, J. (1) The charge against the appellant is that on 16-3-1986, in the afternoon around 5 p m., he committed rape on Urmila Devi wife of Shri Om Parkash in a room in the basement of the building called Items building at Rafi Marg, New Delhi, within the jurisdiction of P S. Parliament Street, New Delhi. He was prosecuted and tried turn an offence under Section 3761PC. The trial court found him guilty for the said offence and convicted him under Section 376 Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo Ri for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000.00 and in default to further undergo Si for three months.(2) Shri Bhatia, learned counsel for Delhi Administration, argued that no lady would involve herself in such a case of rape without any basis or foundation. According to him, the appellant has not given any justification as to why he was given beating by the husband and other relations of the prosecutrix On the point of lodging Fir after four days, Mr Bhatia submitted that ...
L.D. Meena Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT725
V.B. Bansal, J. (1) L.D. Meena has moved this application for bail in Fir No. 242/87 under Section 359 of the Official Secrets Act (for short the 'Act') and Sec. 120B Ipc, P.S. Chanakya Puri, New Delhi. (2) The petitioner along with Sita Ram Rathi and Mohd Yunus is facing trial before an Addl. Sessions Judge, New Delhi where charges was framed against them under Sec. 3(1) (Part-1) of the Official Secrets Act read with Sec. 120B Indian Penal Code with the allegations that between the period 1980 to 10th September, 1987 at Delhi entered into a criminal conspiracy with Sita Ram Rathi and Mohd. Yunus and with foreign agents, namely, Zaridad Khan Rauf Ahmed employees of the Pakistan Embassy for the purpose prejudicial to the safety or interest of the State and in furtherance of the said criminal conspiracy agreed to do or caused to be done illegal acts, i.e. to collect, to obtain and to communicate secret official informations, secret and classified documents pertaining to the Ministry of d...
Zail Singh Vs. Jagan Nath and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: II(1991)ACC128; 1991ACJ644; 44(1991)DLT278; 1991(20)DRJ371
R.L. Gupta, J. (1) These two FAOs 214 and 215 of 1973 and cross- objections in CMs 126 and 521 of 1974 arise out of a common judgment recorded by the learned Tribunal on 24-8-1973. (2) The facts giving rise to the two claim petitions are that on 5-6-1968 at about 4.45 Pm Dr. P.L. Varma, Injured and Ashok Kumar deceased were traveling in car No DLV-7965 driven by Ved Kumar son of Dr. P.L. Varma from Meerut to Delhi. Dr. Varma was sitting on the left front seat while Ashok Kumar was sitting on the back seat. At G.T. Road near Shahdara there was break down of the rear right side axle and so the vehicle swerved to its right side and stopped on the right side of the road with its front wheel on the Kacha and the rest on the puce road. After sometime truck No. Upv 894 driven by Dalip Singh respondent 2 and owned by Zail Singh, appellant came with very fast speed driven recklessly. The truck driver did not make any effort to avoid impact with the stationary car and dashed the truck against it...
Vijay Kumar Alias Vidhar Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT696; 1991RLR304
S.C. Jain, J.(1) The point involved in this revision petition is very short and thereforee, I dispose of this revision petition at the admission stage. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 28.1.1987 he was found carrying on unauthorised construction of two shops on the ground floor of E-11, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi without the sanction of Municipal Corporation of Delhi, which is an offence punishable under Section 461 of Municipal Corporation of Delhi Act. The complaint was filed by M.C.D. against the petitioner. The petitioner has challenged the notice issued to him under Section 251 Cr.P.C. on various grounds. The first contention is that the Magistrate has not applied her mind while entertaining the complaint and issuing notice to him. It was ordered that the petitioner be charged with an offence under Section 461 and the case was adjourned to 30.11.90 for framing charge. On 30.11.90 instead of framing charge, notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. was issued to him in which wr...
Udevir Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: I(1991)ACC583
V.B. Bansal, J.1. Udevir Singh has filed this revision petition under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure thereby challenging his conviction under Sections 279 and 338 IPC recorded by Metropolitan Magistrate and confirmed on appeal by an Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi.2. The petitioner was sentenced to R.I. for a period of six months and with a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default to undergo S.I. for one month under Section 338 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default to undergo S.I. for one month under Section 279 IPC.3. The trial Court had passed the order of conviction on 1st August, 1989 while the order of sentence was announced on 16th August, 1989. Appeal filed by the petitioner was disposed of by an Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi on 17th January, 1991 when conviction for the aforesaid two offences was maintained but the order of sentence was modified to the extent that the substantive sentence for the offence under Section 338 IPC was reduced to three m...