Delhi Court November 1994 Judgments

Delhi State Industrial Development Corporation Vs. Anil Kashyap

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 56(1994)DLT637

P.K. Bahri, J.(1) This is a suit for recover of Rs. 1,05,847.21 paise. On 3rd August 1989, a partial decree was passed by this Court. The said order is reproduced as below - The only dispute is with regard to the rate of interest. According to Mr. Gumani, the defendant is liable to pay interest at the agreed rate of 2-112 per cent per annum, whereas according to Mr. Sharma, the plaintiff is entitled to charge interest at 21 per cent per annum as claimed in the suit with effect from 5th September 1982. There is no dispute that sum of Rs. 43,201.00 was advanced by plaintiff to the defendant. In view of the above, I pass a decree in favor of the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of Rs. 43,201.00 with interest at the rate of 2-112 per cent per annum from. 3rd September 1974 till payment by the defendant to the plaintiff. Whatever amount has been paid by the defendant to the plaintiff, due adjustments of it will be given and the said payment, it is agreed, will be adjusted towards ...

Ravi Kumar Vs. Misha Vadhera and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1994IVAD(Delhi)962; AIR1995Delhi175; 1994(31)DRJ427; ILR1995Delhi157

M. Jagannadha Rao, C.J. (1) ADMITTED. (2) This is an appeal by the 1st defendant against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 8.9.94 in is No. 7909 of 1994 in Suit No. 2828/93 appointing a Receiver in an application filed by the plaintiff-1st respondent without service of the notice in the is on the appellant. (3) The appellant - 1st defendant Mr. Ravi Kumar is admittedly the owner of a flat with commercial space measuring 1106 sq. ft. on the first floor of a multi- storied building, namely, 'Hansalaya', 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. The appellant states that he is a non-resident Indian (NRI) and ha had earlier purchased this property by paying sale consideration in foreign exchange after taking the required permission from the Reserve Bank of India. The plaintiff-1st respondent Misha Vadhera is said to be a builder of the multi- storied building 'Hansalaya' and according to the appellant, the plaintiff is carrying on business in real-estate through respon dent 3, a real-estat...

Krishan Dev Sharma and ors. Vs. Som Dutt Sharma

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1994IVAD(Delhi)969; 58(1995)DLT424

Mr. D.P. Wadhwa, J.1. This is defendants appeal against the judgment and decree dated 4 June, 1982 of the Additional District Judge, (Mr. B.B. Gupta), Delhi, where by the suit of the plaintiff for possession was decree against the defendants with costs. It was also decreed against defendant No. 1 for mesne profits @ Rs. 200/- per month from 5 July 1977, i.e., the date of filing of the suit till delivery of possession. For convenience we will refer to the appellants as defendants and the respondents as plaintiff. The property in question is House No. A/ E-7, Tagore Garden, New Delhi, built on a plot held on perpetual leasehold basis by the plaintiff from the Delhi Development Authority (for short 'D.D.A.'), an authority constituted under the Delhi Development Act, 1957. The. claim of the plaintiff in suit in brief was that he was owner of this property and the defendants were in unauthorised occupation of the same and the plaintiff also claimed pendente lite and future mesne profits. Th...

integrated Organics Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

R.N. Mittal, President: 1. Briefly the facts are that the complainant purchased a Maruti 1000 CC from M/s. Competent Automobiles and Co. Ltd., New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the CAC), on 4-3-1990. It was given temporary registration number HRU 4749. The Complainant paid a sum of Rs. 3,66,298/to the CAC towards purchase price of the car. They got it insured with the opposite party (OP) under cover note No. 359369 on the same date comprehensively and paid an amount of Rs. 11,544/as premium. The cover note was issued by the OP immediately after the purchase i.e. on 4-3-92. 2. Mr. Manish Jain, the Director of the company went to Agra on 5th March '92 alongwith his wife. The car met with an accident at Farah Town around 2.30 p.m., when it was struck by a truck. The truck which hit the car, was driven away by the driver after the accident. The complainant and his wife suffered multiple injuries. 3. The complainant informed the Agra Office of the Opposite Party on the same day. A FIR w...

Monica Electronics Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT440TriDel

1. M/s. Monica Electronics Ltd., New Delhi had availed modvat credit of Central Excise duty on picture tubes which is an input used for the manufacture of television sets. In the course of the visit by the Central Excise Officers it was found that the company had taken such credit of 305 picture tubes which were found to be defective and irreparable. On the basis of the department's view that the credit of such goods would be contrary to the rules for the reason that they were not used in the manufacture of final products, a show cause notice was issued to the company proposing the recovery of a sum of Rs. 3,05,000/- being an amount equal to the duty and also imposition of penalty. After considering the cause shown by the company and hearing the Additional Collector of Customs confirmed the demand for duty and imposed a penalty of Rs. 7,500/-. This appeal is against that order. It was the argument of Shri P.S. Bedi, Consultant for the appellant that picture tubes had become damaged af...

Jaipur Syntex Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)LC726Tri(Delhi)

1. This is an appeal against the order dated 21-7-1986 by the Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur. On 2nd February, 1984 the Central Excise Officers searched the appellants godown situated at Gupta Compound and godown No. 218 at Thaker Compound in Bombay and seized 555 gunny bags containing Yarn comprised of man-made fibres of various description.Thereafter, 81 samples of various lots of yarn were drawn from the seized bundles of yarn and were sent for test to the departmental laboratory at Bombay. Out of the samples of 81 lots the result in respect of 10 samples were found different from the composition of fibres declared in the gate-passes/invoices relating to the particular consignment/lot at the time of clearance from the factory. The appellants made a request for re-testing of these samples. However, the department tested only 9 of the samples in question and out of the result of re-test of 3 samples were found to agree with the declaration made by the appellants at the time of c...

Hindustan Packaging Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)LC245Tri(Delhi)

1. In this case the question that arose for consideration was whether 'Aluminium Foil backed by paper and polyethylene' was classifiable under Sub-heading 7606.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 or as "Laminated paper" falling under Sub-heading 4811.29 of the Central Excise Tariff. The matter was originally heard by a two Member Bench.The learned Member who recorded the order held that the matter was covered by the Tribunal's order in the case of National Dairy Development Board (hereinafter referred to as NDDB) reported in 1992 (59) E.L.T. 65 in which 'Tetra pack Asceptic-Packaging material' made of paper laminated with aluminium foil and polyethylene was held as classifiable under sub-heading 4811.90. However, the second Member expressed the view that the matter needed to be referred to a larger Bench since in the case of NDDB the Tribunal had not considered the effect of definition of Toil' given in Note 1(viii) to Chapter 76 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The point...

Shiv Charan Bajpai Vs. Collector of Cus. and C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1995)LC736Tri(Delhi)

1. These two appeals are directed against the impugned Order-in-Original passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur.2. Factual Backdrop : It was the case of the Department that the officers of the DRI, New Delhi, assisted by the Customs and Central Excise Officers of Kanpur, searched the residential premises of the appellant on 3-9-1973 at 7 A.M. and recovered 41 pieces of primary gold bars of foreign origin and 8 pieces of gold (Bithur) in the presence of Shri Ram Niwas Sharma and Shri Shree Ram Agarwal, and also in the presence of two panch witnesses, namely, Shri Prem Chand Sharma and Shri Bankey Lal, as detailed out in the panchnama/recovery memo, said to have been prepared on the spot. It was alleged that the appellant, Shri Shiv Charan Bajpai, was also present on the spot, but he slipped away from the house when some photographs of the contraband gold, as recovered above, were being taken and accordingly FIR to that effect was lodged at 11.20 A.M. with the Police Station,...

Jag Mohan @ Birju Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: ILR1995Delhi165

M.S.A. Siddioui, J. (1) The sole accused in the case is the appellant in the appeal and respondent in the Murder Reference. He was tried for offences punishable under Sections 302, 363 and under Section 376(f) Indian Penal Code . by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdara, Delhi. He was sen Sauced to death under Section 302 I.P.C. He was also sentenced under Sections 363 and 376(f) Indian Penal Code . to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and life imprisonment respectively. The learned Additional Sessions Judge made a reference for confirmation of death sentence and the accused also preferred an appeal against convictions and sentences and they are being disposed of by this common judgment (2) Shorn of Verbiage, the prosecution case is that on 4-3-88 Kin. Anita aged about 4 years was found missing from her house. Next morning, her dead body was found outside house No. 31/500 of Om Parkash Public Witness 2 resident of Trilok Puri, which was identified by her father Bharat...

Sunil Kumar Vs. Collector of Customs (Airport)

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)(74)ELT951TriDel

1. These are two applications seeking waiver of the pre-deposit and stay in respect of personal penalty of Rs. 1 lakh imposed on each of the applicants herein by the Collector of Customs (Airport) Sahar International Airport, Bombay in the impugned order dated 31-3-1994.The learned Counsel for the applicants Shri G.L. Rawal contended that in this case the Collector of Customs (Airport), Bombay has no jurisdiction at all to adjudicate the case because the goods are in transit as admitted in impugned order itself and were meant to be cleared to home consumption at Calcutta. The learned Counsel further assailed the order on the ground that it was passed in the violation of the principles of natural justice because the Collector has not disclosed the documents on the basis of which the assessable value has been enhanced. The applicants had addressed several letters to the Collector for supply of the documents for which there was no response.Financially, the applicants would find the pre-d...