Delhi Court July 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.
Nahar Singh Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-30-1991
Reported in: 1991(21)DRJ171; (1992)IILLJ573Del
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal where by the appellant challenges judgment of the learned Single Judge who had dismissed the appellant's writ petition which had sought to quash the order dated January 21, 1983 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Delhi setting aside the departmental enquiry against the appellant and directing the ab initio initiation of disciplinary proceedings against the appellant. 2. On an enquiry conducted by the Vigilance Branch it has been found that Constable Nahar Singh had appeared for 'A' list test on May 12, 1978 for selection to Lower School Course but could not succeed as per the result declared on February 8, 1979. Constable Nahar Singh submitted an application on March 31, 1979 to the Additional Commissioner of Police(A), through proper channel, requesting that he was given 33 makes for the service record, whereas he deserved for 39 marks as he had no major or minor punishment to his credit. On examination of his Fauji Missal an...
Old Village Ind Vs. British Airways
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-30-1991
Reported in: 1991RLR443
H.L. Tikku, J.(1) Whether suit is time barred? (I-A) Whether suit filed is maintainable (2) Issue Nos. 1 & 1-A; The only contention raised before me is that the suit on the face of it is time barred and thus, is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. (3) The facts of the case as averred in the plaint, in brief, are that on 17.4.81, the plaintiff through its shipping agents entrusted the deft. two consignments for carriage & freight collect basis to the consignee M/s. Inwear Limited, Montreal (Canada), of the total value of Rs. 2,22,850.00 and the deft. M/s. British Airways issued airway bills which are dt. 17.4.81, pff. is stated to have not heard from the deft. regarding the arrival of the said consignments at the destination for a considerable period and made inquiries vide letter dt. 1.5.81 and its shipping agents vide letter dt. 9.5.81. It is admitted in the plaint that the deft. had vide letter dt. 18.8.81 informed the pff's shipping agents to give instructions for altern...
Vidyut Udyog Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-1991
Reported in: (1992)(60)ELT300TriDel
1. The point for decision before the larger Bench is whether Glass fabrics impregnated with alkyd resin should be classified under 22B of Central Excise Tariff or 22F. 22B CET reads as follows : "Textile fabrics impregnated, coated or laminated with preparation of cellulose derivatives of other artificial plastic materials not elsewhere specified."---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Item Tariff Description Rate of DutyNo.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 2 322F Mineral fibres and yarn, and manufactures therefrom, in or in relation to the manufacture of which any process is ordinarily carried on with the aid of power, the following namely:-(1) Glass Fibre and yarn including glass tissues and Fifteen per cent ad glass wool; valorem.(2) Asbestos fibre and yarn; Fifteen per cent ad(3) Any other mineral fibre or yarn whether continuous Fifteen per cent ad or otherwise, such as slag woo...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Panchmukhi Engg. Works and anr.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-1991
Reported in: (1992)(41)LC457Tri(Delhi)
1. Since a common issue is involved in all the three matters, a common order is being passed.2. The question involved in these cases is whether the 'Dharmada' charged by the assessees, i.e. respondents herein should be included in the assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 or not.3. Shri V.K. Jain, learned SDR for the appellant-Collector has urged that 'Dharmada' is compulsorily paid by the customers of the assessees, and, therefore, it must form part of the assessable value under Section 4. There is no option that the customers are not to pay Dharmada. In that view, he submits that Dharmada would form part of the assessable value of the goods.4. Rebutting the arguments of the learned SDR, Shri V. Lakshmi Kumaran, learned Advocate for the Respondents has urged that this is a matter covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Mohan & Co. v.Collector of Central Excise, Madras, which in turn is based on Supreme Court's judgment in the ...
Kohinoor Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-1991
Reported in: (1992)(38)LC206Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s Kohinoor Impex Pvt. Ltd., 1/25, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi, has filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by Collector of Customs, Bombay. Simultaneously, a stat application duly supported with an affidavit was also filed. A notice of hearing dated 6th February, 1991 was issued, listing the matter for hearing on 29th March, 1991.When the matter was called on 29th March, 1991, Shri A.S. Sunder Rajan, learned Consultant, made a request for adjournment on the ground that he wanted to file balance-sheet, and the other side did not oppose the request. On the request of the learned Consultant, the matter was adjourned to 1lth April, 1991; and on 11th April, 1991, it was pointed out that the Revenue authorities were pursuing recovery proceedings and it was also pointed out that since the stay application was pending, the Revenue authorities should not have resorted to recovery proceedings. In support of the applicant's plea, decisions were cited and the Bench had again point...
Collector of Customs Vs. Century Automobiles
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-1991
Reported in: (1992)(38)ECC72
1. Collector of Customs, Bombay, has filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Bombay.Collector of Customs (Appeals) Bombay had disposed of three appeals by a common order. The original appeal was received in the Registry on the 16th day of October, 1984 and the supplementary appeals were received in the Registry on the 11th day of March, 1991 and both the appeals are supported with an application for condonation of delay.2. Shri S.K. Roy, learned SDR, has made a prayer for grant of condonation of delay on the ground that the appellant had bona fidely filed a single appeal, as soon as he discovered that two more appeals have to be filed, he filed the same and the original appeal was filed within the stipulated period.3. Shri L.P. Asthana, learned Advocate, who has appeared on behalf of the respondent, stated that in view of the submissions of the learned SDR, he has got no objection for condonation of delay.4. We have heard both the si...
Master Vinay Kumar Vs. the Central Board of Secondary Education and An ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Delhi286
ORDERBansal, J.1. Rule D. B.2. On a request by counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the dispute we have heard the writ petition at this stage.3. Master Vinay Kumar petitioner has by way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prayed that the memo dated 8th August, 1990 by Central Board of Secondary Education respondent No. I thereby cancelling the examination of the petitioner for Senior School Certificate Examination; 1990 and debarring him from appearing at the Board Examination to be held in the years 1991 and 1992 who, thus, could appear in full subjects in the examinations to be held in March/April 1993 and further for a direction to respondent No. I to allow the petitioner to appear in the examination for XIIth Standard (Accountancy paper only) so that the petitioners result for 1990 examination already held is published.4. Briefly stated the facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are as follows:Master Vinay Kumar has b...
Sukhdev Raj and anr. Vs. Sangeeta Budh Raja and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-1991
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT111
Santosh Duggal, J. (1) This revision petition is directed against an order allowing amendment of the plaint in the suit filed by respondent No. 1 therein. By the impugned order, the trial Court allowed prayer for amendment of the plaint after taking note of all the objections raised on behalf of the defendants in the case and it was observed that the proposed amendments are necessary for the just decision of the case and no mala fide can be imputed to the plaintiff and the only intention seems to be to clarify the stand of the plaintiff. It was also noted that all possible objections have already .been taken 'by the defendants in the written statement filed to the original plaint and the 'plaintiff was prepared to pay Court fee after proper valuation of the suit property, and that on the facts and circumstances of the case no prejudice would be caused to the defendants in allowing the amendment. (2) The main contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is that the plaintiff has been ...
Vinay Kumar Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-1991
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT279
V.B. Bansal, J.(1) Rule D.B. (2) On a request by Counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the dispute we have heard the writ petition at this stage. (3) Master Vinay Kumar petitioner has by way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, of India prayed that the memo dated 8th August, 1990 by Central Board of Secondary Education respondent No. I thereby cancelling the examination of the petitioner for Senior School Certificate Examination, 1990 and debarring him from appearing at the Board Examination to be held in the years 1991 and 1992 who, thus, could appear in full subjects in the examinations to be held in March/April 1993 and further for a direction to respondent No. 1 to allow the petitioner to appear in the examination for XIIth Standard (Accountancy paper only) so that the petitioner's result for 1990 examination already held is published. (4) Briefly stated the facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are as follows: (5) Master Vina...
R.K. Aggarwal Vs. Registrar Co-operative Societies, Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-1991
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT105
B.N. Kirpal, J. (1) This is a Utters Patent Appeal challenging the judgment of a single Judge of this Court, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging his expulsion from the respondent Cooperative Society had been dismissed. I (2) Briefly stated, the facts are that the appellant became a member of the New Indraprastha Cooperative House Building Society Ltd., sometime in the year 1964. The said Society raised demands and the appellant had till 1973, paid a sum of Rs 3.837.00 . At times there was delay in the payment by the appellant, despite notices having been issued by the respondent Society, (3) It seems that there were three more demands which were raised on 1st December, 1972, 1st June, 1973 and May. 1974 for a sum of Rs. 750.00 on each occasion. Thus a total sum of R.S. 2,250.00 was not paid by the petitioner. Action was sought to be taken to expel the petitioner from the; membership of the Society but the petitioner rushed to the Civil Court and obtained interi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »