Delhi Court October 1993 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.
Eap Industries Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-06-1993
Reported in: (1993)(68)ELT851TriDel
1. M/s. EAP Industries Ltd., Calcutta has filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Judicial), Calcutta-II. The said appeal was presented in the Calcutta registry on the 10th day of April, 1992 and thereafter the same was transferred to the Delhi registry. The stay application duly supported with an affidavit was also simultaneously presented and the same was also transferred to the Delhi registry. When the Bench enquired from the appellant whether the said stay application was not heard by the E.R.B. at Calcutta, Shri R. Swaminathan, the learned Consultant* stated that since the advocate is Delhi based it was more convenient for the appellant to have the hearing of the stay application in Delhi and as such he requested that it should be heard in Delhi. Shri Swaminathan, the learned Advocate* who has appeared on behalf of the appellant has pleaded that the duty in the present matter is Rs. 26,13,964/- and penalty is of Rs. 3 lakhs for th...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. V.S. Engineers
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-06-1993
Reported in: (1994)LC96Tri(Delhi)
1. These three appeals have been filed against the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of "Fuse Switches" of various types. They filed a classification list for their product, claiming assessment @ 15% ad valorem under sub-heading 8536.90 read with Notification No.160/86, dated 1-3-1986. The Assistant Collector vide his order dated 21-5-1987 approved the classification of 'Fuse Switches' under sub-heading 8536.90 but held that the goods not being eligible for exemption under Notification No. 160/86 were assessable @ 20% ad valorem. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Assistant Collector the respondents filed an appeal before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, who vide his order dated 16-12-1988 held that the product in question was classifiable under Heading 85.37 and assessable to duty at the rate of 15%. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Collector, Central Excise (Appeals) t...
India Optical and Scientific Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-06-1993
Reported in: (1994)(69)ELT511TriDel
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the Order-in-original No. 17/Collector/MP/85 dated 21-8-1985 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur. The case was proceeded against the party on the ground that the party was not maintaining varietywise accounts of stock cards of the glass and glassware manufactured by them, in their RG 1 register. Central Excise Officers, Firozabad, visited the factory of the appellants on 23-5-1980 and found that stocks were not stored in an ordinary manner and hence the goods were detained for verification. Production register for the period 1-1-1979 to 29-4-1980 and RG 1 register of the factory from 1-1-1980 to 23-5-1980 were resumed and scrutinised with varietywise clearances shown in the Bill-cum-gate passes and itemwise production figures shown in production register. On counting of itemwise stocks on 2nd and 3rd June, 1980 sub-tariff itemwise totals of stocks were not found agreeable with the recorded balance of R...
Uttam Wires and Machines Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-06-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)ARBLR98(Delhi); 52(1993)DLT383
P.N. Nag, J. (1) By this petition under Sections 33(8) & 20(4)of the Arbitration Act. 1940, the petitioner has prayed for an appointment of any person as an arbitrator in contract dated 27-3-1973 in accordance with law to adjudicate the disputes as specified in paragraph 7(a) and (b) of thispetition.(2) The relevant facts relating to the filing of this petition are that the petitioner Uttam Wires and Machines (P) Ltd. had filed a Suit No. 1489-Aof 1987 relating to the present contract dated 27-3-1973. Vide order dated19-7-1989 this Court disposed of the suit directing the respondents to file the arbitration agreement and appoint an arbitrator in accordance with the law.The decision in the said suit No 1489-A/87 has been reported in : AIR1990Delhi72 State of Rajasthan filed an appeal (FAO (OS) 227/89) against the aforesaid decision dated 19-7-1989 which wai also dismissed vide Division Benches order dated 13-1-1992 passed by G.C. Mittal, Chief Justice, end SatPal, J., with the result, t...
Naresh Kumar Gupta Vs. Nav Bharat Times Co-operative Group Housing Soc ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-06-1993
Reported in: 53(1994)DLT642; 1994(28)DRJ56
Mohd. Shamim, J. (1) Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the present objections preferred by the respondent against the award dated May 23, 1990 rendered by the arbitrator. According to the learned counsel, the impugned objections preferred by the respondent against the award alluded to above, are hopelessly barred by time. Thus, they cannot be looked into and are liable to be flung to the winds on this short ground alone The learned counsel in support of his argument has led me through the order dated January 20,1991 passed by the Deputy Registrar of this Court. According to the learned counsel as per the report of the process server the notice with regard to the filing of the award was accepted for and on behalf of the respondent on November 19,1990. Thus, the argument further proceeds, period of limitation for filing objections would start running from the said date and in case it is so computed the objections c...
J.N. Constructions Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-06-1993
Reported in: 1994(1)ARBLR197(Delhi); 52(1993)DLT529
V.B. Bansal, J. (1) M/S. J.N. Constructions, plaintiff, filed this suit under Section 14 and Section 17 of the Arbitration Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') with the prayers that Shri C. Rama Rao, the sole Arbitrator,defendant No. 2 may be asked the file the original Award Along with the-proceedings in Court and, thereafter, to make Award the Rule of the Court and to pass a decree in terms of the Award Along with interest at the rate of15 per cent per annum from the date of the' Award till realisation.(2) Briefly stated, the facts leading to the filing of this suit are that the work for the Construction of Residential School for Mentally Retarded Children 'Anchal' at Kautilya Marg, New Delhi, SH: Construction of Dining Hall, Servants Quarters s'.ld Lily pool was entrusted to the plaintiff by the New Delhi Municipal Committee, defendant No 1. The work was executed by the plaintiff but certain disputes arose between the parties which were referred to Sir C. Rama Rao, defendant N...
Hindustan Playing Cards Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-05-1993
Reported in: (1993)(68)ELT906TriDel
1. This is an appeal against the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay allowing the appeal filed by the Department against the order passed by the Assistant Collector. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that 'Printed Cartons and Boxes' for packing playing cards manufactured by the appellants were being assessed to duty under T.I. 17(4) read with Notification No. 67/82 dated 28-2-1982. After the issue of Notification No. 144/82 dated 22-4-1982 they discontinued the payment of Central Excise duty and maintenance of Central Excise records even though they were asked by the Superintendent to file a revised classification. On test of the sample of the appellants' product, the examiner opined that the material of the 'Printed Cartons' manufactured by the appellants was made of paper board made of chemical pulp backed by PVC film on one side backed by PVC film. The appellants were served with a show cause notice dated 29-9-1983 demanding duty amounting to Rs...
Hansalaya Properties Vs. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-05-1993
Reported in: 1993IVAD(Delhi)217; 52(1993)DLT149; (1993)105PLR5
V.B. Bansal, J.(1) Hansalaya Properties, petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, thereby challenging the order dated 18/03/1993 of Shri M.A. Khan, Appellate Tribunal,Municipal Corporation of Delhi, thereby rejecting the application of the petitioner under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.(2) Hansalaya Properties, the petitioner is a partnership concern andSmt. Pushpa Vadera is one of the partners, through whom, this petition has been filed. The petitioner is the promoter/builder/owner of the multistorey building named 'HANSALAYA', situated at Bara Khamba Road, NewDelhi. An agreement to sell the i 1th floor of this building was entered into between the petitioner and M/s. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited, respondent No. 1 in the year 19,0 while an agreement to sell in respect of 12thfloor of this building was entered into between Orissa Cement Limited . petitioner. Subsequently, on the basis of a settlement arrived at between respon...
Mohan Singh Kashyap Vs. Sohan Singh and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-05-1993
Reported in: 1993IVAD(Delhi)166; 52(1993)DLT428
Sat Pal, J.(1) This is an application filed by the defendants under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read within Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and in this application the plaintiff has sought the permission of this Court to raise the boundary wall on the suit property bearing No. 33/41,Punjabi Bagh (West), New Delhi for the proper safety and security of theproperty. It has also been prayed in the application that the plaintiff be restrained by means of an ad interim injunction from causing any obstruction in erection of boundary walls facing front road and side road of the saidproperty.(2) Notice of this application was given to the plaintiff who has filed the reply in opposition to the application. The plaintiff has submitted that it was the right and prerogative of the plaintiff either to construct the wall or not as the plaintiff was in occupation of the land in question.(3) Mr. Sindhwani, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant/applicant, submitted that the suit pro...
V. Gupta Vs. L.M.P. Precision Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-05-1993
Reported in: 1993IVAD(Delhi)160; 52(1993)DLT402; 1993(27)DRJ642
J.K. Mehra, J. (1) This is a suit filed by one Mr. V. Gupta, against the defendant company for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,03,496.00 together with interest @ 21% from the defendant on account of wrongful transfer and non-payment of wages for six month in lieu of notice and other dues and interest thereon. The summons in this suit were issued and the defendant in response thereto filed its written statement resisting the claim of the plaintiff on various grounds including that of limitation.(2) The case of the plaintiff is that he was appointed by the defendant vide letter of appointment dated 22/2/1980 as General Manager (Northern Region) to be posted at Delhi at a salary of Rs.3,500.00 p.m. plus certain other benefits such as House Rent Allowance,carallowance, servant allowance, club expenses and medical allowance etc. Following the issue of letter of appointment the plaintiff joined the employment of the defendant w.e.f. 1st May, 1980. The parties have mainly relied upon the documents ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »