Delhi Court December 1994 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1994 Page 7 of about 144 results (0.021 seconds)Paramount Publicity (P) Ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)91; 57(1995)DLT183; 1995(32)DRJ185
Dalveer Bhandari, J.(1) The plaintiff has filed this suit for permanent injunction with the following prayer: 'TO pass a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant company by itself, its officers, employees, servants/agents or any other person whomsoever, from removing, defacing, damaging and/or interfering in any manner whatsoever, with the plaintiff's hoardings as detailed in Schedule-'A' to the plaint;'(2) In annexure 'A' the location and the site has been indicated as on the round about of the crossing at Punchkuin Road and Link Road (8 Hoarding Sites). (3) This court issued summons to the defendants and in the interlocutory application, passed an ex parte injunction restraining the defendants from removing, defacing, damaging or interfering in any manner with the plaintiff's advertisements/hoardings on the round about of the crossing at Panchkuin Road and Link Road. (4) The defendant M.C.D. in the written statement had taken preliminary objection that plaintiff is gu...
Tag this Judgment!Shakti Singh and ors. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 57(1995)DLT731
S.D. Pandit, J. (1) Shakti Singh s/o Bhagwana, Ashok Kumar s/o Bhagwana,both residents of A2/50-51, Sultan Puri, Delhi and Zile Singh s/o Sardare resident of A2/273 Sultanpuri, Delhi stand convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge of Delhi in Session's Case No. 38/90 for the offences punishable under Sections 147,148,188 and 302 read with Sections 149,201 read with Sections 149,395 read with Section 149 and 395 read with Section 149. Each of them is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 147, rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 148, rigorous imprisonment for three months under Section 188, rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 201 read with Section 149, rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 12,000 each and in default of payment of fine further rigorous imprisonment for 2' years under Section 395 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.(2) The appellants were challaned in Fir No. 254/84 on the alle...
Tag this Judgment!Vrat Pmil Gupta Vs. the Board of Governors (itt) Delhi
Court: Delhi
Reported in: ILR1995Delhi361
Dalveer Bhandari, J.(1) The plaintiff has filed this Suit for recovery of Rs. 1,10,296.19 with interest and costs of the suit. The plaintiff has filed the Suit with the prayer that a decree turn recovery of the said amount on account of pay and allowances, increments, promotional pay and all other due benefits in the form of pay and allowances for the period from 8-1 1-1968 to 2-9-1982 find interest on the G.P.F. accumulations and interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum on the entire amount for the period up to the date of the decree. (2) The plaintiff joined the Indian Institute of Technology. Delhi as Upper Division Clerk on 3-2-1966. He was confirmed on 3rd February, 1967 as a permanent Upper Division Clerk. (3) On 14-12-1967, a charge memorandum was issued alleging that the plaintiff 'had been found to be non-cooperative. quarrelsome, having bad temperament and abnormal behavior. uncongenial to efficiency'. The charge also stated that 'on more than one occasion, he used vulga...
Tag this Judgment!Sameer Recording Electronics Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(76)ELT162TriDel
1. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal and for staying the operation of the order, seeking waiver of pre-deposit under Section 129-E of the Customs Act, 1962 by the petitioners.2. Shri Kumaraswamy, learned Consultant concedes at the outset, that the delay is quite long but points out that the delay is due to their having pursued alternative remedies before the High Court and thereafter in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court had, vide their judgment dated 10-1-1994, dismissed their S.L.P. but left it open to them to approach the Customs authorities for any accommodation in the matter of grant of time for payment. The learned Consultant in his written brief, has referred to a number of decisions where delays, on account of the concerned applicants spending time by way of alternative remedies in the Court, had been directed to be condoned. He pleads that on the basis of such decisions, their present request for condonation of delay may be allowed.3. Shri...
Tag this Judgment!Polychem Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(75)ELT919TriDel
1. This is an appeal filed against the order of Collector (Appeals), Bombay No. 74/93, dated 5th Oct. 1993.2. Ld. Counsel stated that the appellants are manufacturers of 'toluene' and the dispute is regarding its classification. The rival entries are 27.07 and 29.02.3. They filed classification lists from time to time under Chapter 29.The classification list filed after the budget of 1991 was approved provisionally by the A.C. pending chemical test.4. On receipt of the test report the department sought to alter the classification from 2902 to 2707.20.5. They replied to the show cause notice and requested for re-test. On re-test also the Chief Chemist reported that the sample does not satisfy the parameters for 'toluene' as per HSN explanatory notes under Heading 29.02 aromatic hydro carbons.6. The Asstt. Collector has held in his order that the product cannot be said to be chemically defined and easily recognisable as a separate chemical substance and therefore it was classifiable und...
Tag this Judgment!Modi Carpets Limited Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)175; 58(1995)DLT481; 1995(32)DRJ14; 1997(91)ELT285(Del)
ORDERK. Shivashankar Bhat, J.1. The only prayer that survives for consideration pertains to the taxability of the material called 'sliver' obtained as an in process material in the manufacture of semi-worsted carpet yarn, in the factory of the petitioner company; the action taken by the Revenue to levy excise duty on this material under the provisions of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (the 'Act') is under challenge. At the time of filing the Writ Petitioner, validity of a few statutory provisions was raised, but, these provisions have been upheld in other cases. 2. The basic question is whether this material referred as 'Sliver' is of a transient character which comes into existence during the manufacture of the semi-worsted carpet yarn; in other words, whether this in process material, captivity consumed, has actually an individual identity having a market, so that it can be considered as 'goods' to attract the levy of excise duty. 3. The petitioner-company in Para 2 of the Wr...
Tag this Judgment!V.K. Construction Works Ltd. Vs. Army Welfare Housing Organisation and ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)165; 1995(1)ARBLR184(Delhi); 57(1995)DLT93; 1995(32)DRJ712
Vijender Jain, J.(1) This order shall dispose of Omp Nos.70/93, 87/93 and 91/93 as these petitions raise similar question. (2) The petitioner has filed this petition under Sections 5,11 and 12 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940. The petitioner is a public limited company. Respondent No.1 is Army Welfare Housing Organisation. Respondent no. I awarded the work of construction of residential unit at Jaipur, Jalandhar and Ludhiana. The petitioner has, inter alia, prayed that the authority of the Arbitrator Maj.Gen.J.S. Lamba be revoked after removing him and Court may appoint another Arbitrator in place of the Arbitrator appointed by respondent No.1. (3) MR.ATUL Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that in terms of the arbitration agreement once the respondent appointed an arbitrator and in the event of that arbitrator resigning, respondent No.1 has no authority pursuant to that agreement to supply the .vacancy of the arbitrator. (4) The case of the petitioner is that one B...
Tag this Judgment!income-Tax Officer Vs. Lall'S Gem Exports
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)52ITD385(Delhi)
1. Common issue involved in these two appeals of the revenue is relating to deduction under Section 80HHC. Assessing Officer had not included the counter sales made by the assessee against foreign exchange in India as the export turnover in respect of which deduction under Section 80HHC was permissible. CIT(A) passed a consolidated order for assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89 directing the Assessing Officer to treat the local counter sales made against foreign exchange as export sales for the purposes of computation of deduction under Section 80HHC.2. It has been brought to our notice that Section 80HHC has been amended by the Finance (No. 2) Act of 1991 retrospectively by virtue of which counter sales are not to be regarded to be exports out of India which do not involve clearance at any custom station as defined in the Customs Act of 1962. In this connection, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Assessing Officer v. Gem Arts [IT Appeal No. 323 (D...
Tag this Judgment!Kishan Singh Vs. Madan Jha, Financial Commissioner and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 57(1995)DLT139; (1995)110PLR7
Devinder Gupta, J.(1) Order passed on 7.3.1994 by the Competent Authority (Slum), Delhi (Annexure D) dismissing petitioner's application moved under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for stay of proceedings till decision of the suit preferred by him as also the order passed on 22.4.1994(Annexure E) by respondent No.1dismissing the petitioner's appeal are under challenge in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.(2) It is not in dispute that a suit for specific performance of contract was filed by the petitioner against respondents 2 & 3 seeking to enforce an agreement,alleged to have been entered into between him and respondents 2 & 3 for sale of a property. After institution of suit, a petition under Section 19 of the Slum Area (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')was filed by respondents 2 & 3 seeking permission to file proceedings for eviction against the petitioner from the premises in question. During the pendenc...
Tag this Judgment!State Bank of India Vs. Punjab National Bank
Court: Delhi
Reported in: I(1996)BC251; 57(1995)DLT55
R.P. Gupta, J.(1) This suit is for recovery of Rs. 80,605.00 against defendantNo. 1 now (the suit having been withdrawn against defendants 2 to 9 and having been dismissed as such vide order dated 22/4/1988 of this Court). The allegations by the plaintiff are that the defendant No. 1 Bank (Punjab National Bank) sent a cheque for collection. It was Cheque No. OC/16-383575, dated 10/12/1964 for Rs. 80,605.00purporting to be drawn by Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi, in favor of one Durlabh Singh, son of Shyam Singh. It was endorsed to the Bank and it bore endorsement of the Punjab National Bank that payee's account has been credited.The plaintiff believed the cheque to be genuine and on 29/12/1964 made payment of the cheque to defendant No. 1 (Punjab National Bank), Ajmeri Gate ExtensionBranch, Ajmeri Gate, New Delhi. It is asserted that around 18/1/1965, the plaintiff received a letter of that date from Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi, informing thata cheque leaf bearing the aforesai...
Tag this Judgment!