Delhi Court September 1991 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1991 Page 8 of about 93 results (0.024 seconds)Triveni Engineering Ltd. Vs. Belganga Sahakari Sakharkarkhana Ltd. and ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1992Delhi164; I(1992)BC487
Anil Dev Singh, J. (1) This is a plaintiff's application under Order 39 rules 1 and 2 Civil Procedure Code wherein inter alia, it is prayed that the defendant No. 1 be restrained from encashing bank guarantees Nos. 316189141 and 316/89/42 for a sum of Rs. 18.20 lakhs each issued by Standard Chartered Bank, defendant No. 2 in favor of defendant No. 1 on behalf of the plaintiff. It is an admitted case of the padres that defendant No. 1 is running a sugar plant and in order to increase the capacity of the plant from 1250 Tcd to 2500 Tcd it entered into an agreement dated July 4, 1988 with the plaintiff whereunder the plaintiff undertook to erect-and supply additional plant and machinery and also agreed to render various other services for raising the capacity of the plant for which the plaintiff was to be paid a sum of Rs. 364 lacs by defendant No. 1. Under the contract, the plaintiff was required to furnish two bank guarantees in terms ofthe agreement; one in respect of timely delivery, ...
Tag this Judgment!Ctr Mfg. Industries Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1992)(38)ECC8
1. This is an appeal against the order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. The appellants imported a consignment of Tin alloy foil and claimed its assessment in terms of Notification No.30/81 dated 1-3-1981 which extended partial exemption from customs duty to tin foil when imported for the manufacture of plastic film capacitors. However, the concessional assessment claimed by the appellants was denied on the grounds that Notification No. 30/81 dated 1-3-1981 exempted Tin Foil, whereas the imported materials was an alloy of Tin, Lead and certain other metals. The appellants' claim for refund of differential duty amounting to Rs. 9,010.18 was rejected by the Assistant Collector.2. In the appeal against the Assistant Collector's order the appellants contended that foil made of tin without admixture of any alloying element was not usable as raw material in the manufacture of plastic film capacitors and on this account the Government had issued revised Notification No. 2...
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan Prefab Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1992)(39)LC210Tri(Delhi)
1. The applicants have made a prayer for dispensing with the pre-deposit of the duly amount of Rs. 48,04,726.79 and penalty of Rs. 50.000/-. Shri D.N. Kohli, learned Consultant, has appeared on behalf of the applicants and pleaded that there was a Calcutta High Court's decision in favour of the applicants, and as such, the applicant was of the honest belief that the value of the inserts is not to be calculated in the assessable value. He referred to a decision reported in 1988 (17) ECR 737. Shri Kohli pleaded that the period involved is 1985 to 1990, and the show cause notice is dated 3rd May, 1990, and at the worst, the applicants can be desired to pay the demand which is within six months and that comes to about Rs. 4 lakhs. Shri Kohli fairly staled that a Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal and a decision of the Supreme Court is against the applicants on merits. But he also stated that he had been filing the price lists repeatedly from time to lime and with the price lists, the a...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Customs Vs. Chloride Industries Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1992)(39)LC117Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 3.12.1990 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Calcutta which has been filed by the Collector of Customs, Calcutta. The facts in brief are as follows: 2. M/s. Chloride Industries Ltd. imported consignment of Sevacurb MT-Black N-990, Tellurium Powder and Areonex - BLE 75 as raw materials for battery manufacture. B/E was filed in the Custom House on 20.12.1989 for clearance of the goods. The same was assessed to duly under heading 2803.00, 2804.50 and 3802.90 r/w. 157/84 r/w. 136/86 & r/w. 77/86 respectively. Respondents cleared the goods after payment of duty under Bill of Entry No. DI-807 dated 22.3.1990. At the time of assessment respondents neither sought benefit under Notification 195/76 Cus as amended by 92/80 Cus nor did they raise protest before the assessing officer.3. After clearance of the goods respondents filed a claim of refund for Rs. 2,34,528.00 through M/s. Orient Transport Co. on the ground that exemption ...
Tag this Judgment!Brahmjit Singh and Another Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1992CriLJ408
ORDER1. By this revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C. 1973, two petitioners, namely, Brahmjit Singh and Benjamin, had challenged the judgment dated 16th of May, 1979 of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the impugned judgment) upholding their conviction and sentence under Sections 392 and 365 read with Section 34, IPC. 2. At the outset, it may be noted that the incident occurred on 27th of Oct. 1978 (over 12 years age). Four persons, namely, Khazan and Bishamber and the two above-named petitioners were put up for trial. The trial Court came to the conclusion that there was no prima facie case made out against Khazan and Bishamber and discharged them. Brahmjit died during pendency of this petition. Thus, we are now concerned with only one surviving accused, namely, Benjamin, petitioner No. 2 herein. 3. According to the prosecution, on 8th of June, 1975, in the early hours, the above-named four persons came in a car bearing regi...
Tag this Judgment!Raj Pal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1992ACJ514; 1992CriLJ1470; 1992(22)DRJ166; 1991RLR540
ORDER1. Notradamus says world will end in 1997. For Gopal Dass and Bhagwani Devi at least, it ended on June 4, 1976 at about 8.30 a.m. on Boulevard Road near Sabzi Mandi. There lives were cut short by a DTC bus (DLP 672) being driven by Raj Pal. It hit a three-wheel scooter coming from the opposite side. Gopal Dass was its driver while Bhagwani Devi a passenger. The scooter had yet another passenger. His name was A. K. Bhatia. He was lucky - in the sense that he escaped death though at the expense of grievous injuries. Who knows he may have a laugh at Notradamus too. But, coming back to the case, the errant bus driver Raj Pal was arrested at the spot, and later tried and convicted by Mr. Prem Kumar, Metropolitan Magistrate. The conviction was under sections 304A and 338 of the Indian Penal Code. While under section 304A he was awarded rigorous imprisonment for eighteen months and a fine of Rs. 2000/-, the sentences imposed under Section 338 was four months' rigorous imprisonment beside...
Tag this Judgment!Roshan Lal Vs. Kuldip Raj
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1991RLR535
Kuldip Raj, J.(1) [ED. facts : Petitioner is living at Udaipur and doing business there with his sons. His wife had cancer in 1978 and was treated at Aiims up to 1985. He is suffering from heart disease and his doctor advised him for specialized treatment at AIIMS. He sued respondent for eviction u/S 14(1)(e) of Delhi Rent Control Act (the Act). After trial Additional R.C. held that he was owner-landlord, letting was for residence and that he had no accommodation at Delhi. But his petition was dismissed on the ground that he had not proved bonafide need. He filed revision in High Court]. After detailing above, judgment is:(2) Aggrieved, this revision has been filed by the petitioner. Arguments advanced before me is only with respect to the finding of the Addl. R.C. that the petitioner has failed to prove the bonafide requirement. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, no doubt, the petitioner along with his family members is residing at Udaipur and doing business there, b...
Tag this Judgment!Petrofils Cooperative Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1992)LC136Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal is directed against the orders of the lower authorities confirming a demand of duty of Rs. 62,77,908.77 against three show cause notices issued as under - (a) Show-cause notice issued on 21-6-1984 for Rs. 33,85,302.96 for the period from January, 1984 to May, 1984; (b) Show-cause notice issued on 30-11-1984 for Rs. 99,70,742.42 for the period from June, 1984 to November, 1984; and (c) Show-cause notice issued on 2-9-1985 for Rs. 29,02,033.13 for the period from December, 1984 to August, 1985.The order of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Division IV, Vadodara has been fully upheld by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay and hence this appeal to the Tribunal.2. The proceedings giving rise to the present order arise out of an objection of the Central Excise Revenue Audit, according to which exemption under Notification 172/72-C.E., dated 24-7-1972 being applicable only to hard waste, in the absence of any segregation of different types of waste which...
Tag this Judgment!P.V. Kapoor and anr. Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1992CriLJ128; 1991(21)DRJ285; 1991RLR513
B.N. Kirpal, J. (1) Two lawyers of this court have filed this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution, in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, alleging that in the police firing on a crowd of un- armed students on 25th September, 1970 in or about IN a Market, New Delhi, one Devinder Kumar Sharma was mercilessly and cold- bloodily killed. The evidence for this occurrence is stated to be contained in a video film which was shot by M/s Living Media India Limited and distributed in the October, 1990 issue of video news magazine in the name and style of News TRACK.(2) The petition is based on the aforesaid issue of News Track According to the averments in the petition, Devinder Kumar Sharma was shot at somewhere above the waist by the Delhi Police and thereafter he was dragged for a considerable distance by the very shattered arm which hung limp and twisted and he was thereafter lifted into a police jeep. It is further alleged that while he was being dragged in this manner...
Tag this Judgment!Khazan Singh Vs. State Etc.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT352; I(1993)DMC274
D.K. Jain, J.(1) This is a Letters Patent Appeal from the order of the learned Single Judge dated 24th February, 1987. (2) Khazan Singh, the appellant herein, is the husband of Smt. Kunti Devi, the deceased. Smt. Kunti Devi died on 7 May, 1967 leaving behind four sons, namely Dinesh Kumar, Mohinder Kumar, Yoginder Kumar and Salinder Kuroar and two daughters, namely Pushpa and Sushma besides the husband, Khazan Singh. (3) On 6 October, 1972 the appellant filed an application under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for. grant of a probate in respect of the alleged Will of Smt. Kunti Devi. The appellant had propounded a paper writing Ex. Pi, dated 26 August, 1965 as a last Will and testament of the deceased. The only property left behind by the deceased was a house property. As per the said' Will the deceased had made a bequest of the immovable property in favor of the appellant. (4) One of the sons of the deceased, namely Dinesh Kumar filed objections to the said petition. A...
Tag this Judgment!