Delhi Court February 1994 Judgments

M.D. Oswal Hosiery Vs. D.D. Gupta and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 54(1994)DLT1; (1994)IILLJ1074Del

Anil Dev Singh, J.1. This is a writ petition challenging the order of the Labour Court, Delhi dated 5 October 1974, whereby the second respondent (workman) was held entitled to receive back-wages for the period 1 September 1971 to 31 July 1973, at the rate of Rs. 144 per month amounting to Rs. 3,292, from the petitioner (employer). Facts as appear from the petition are as follows :- 2. The petitioner is a manufacturer of hosiery goods at Delhi. Respondent 2 was working with the petitioner as a cutter. On 19 July 1972, respondent 2 filed an application before the Labour Court, Delhi, in the form of a 'statement of claim', with the allegations, inter alia, that he was appointed as a cutter by the management on piece-rate basis with effect from 19 October 1970, that the petitioner refused to give him work from 1 September 1971, and that his monthly wages ranged between Rs. 250-350 per month. On 24 October 1992, the statement of the second respondent was recorded by the Labour Court wherei...

Deepak Dewan Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1994IAD(Delhi)997; 1994(28)DRJ661

K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.(1) The petitioner challenges the guidelines dated 9.4.1990 (Annexure A) issued by the Central Government read with the Press Release dated 12.11.1990 (Annexure B) issued by the 3rd respondent (SEBI), as well as the Press Note dated 11.3.1991 (Annexure C) issued by the Union of India, which purport to regulate the business of Merchant Banking. (2) Petitioner is an Advocate and admittedly 'engaged primarily in advisory and consultancy work in areas relating to issue of capital by Public and Private Companies'. The nature of the advisory work is explained in para 4 of the writ petitioner, which indicates that the said work is mostly the work performed by any Advocate. Though the petitioner asserts that his activities are commonly and popularly known as 'Merchant Banking' activities, it seems to me, that these activities do not exhaust the activities of 'Merchant Banking', because the activities of the petitioner do not cover any kind of 'Underwriting' or 'Portfoli...

Handicrafts and Textiles Industries and anr. Vs. the Chief Controller ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1994IAD(Delhi)906; 54(1994)DLT5; 1994(28)DRJ590

K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.(1) The petitioner is engaged in the business of import and export and as such petitioner was entitled to the grant of export house certificate. In lieu of the export made, export house like the petitioner will be entitled to certain rebates like grant of additional and Rep import license amongst other benefits. The petitioner was accordingly issued additional license No-3043601 dated 25.1.1995 for Rs.3,30,220.00 entitling the importation of various items referred in the license. As per the policy, license is issued in duplicate. One copy is referred as 'Customs Copy' and the other is referred as 'Exchange Control Copy'. The present writ petition involves the subject of 'Exchange Control Copy'. It is the case of the petitioner that certain auto parts were imported under two consignments referred in the writ petition. They were discharged on or about 19.10.1985 and 9.11.1985. The payment had to be made through the bankers and accordingly the suppliers issued, bil...

M.S.O. Building Employees Consumer Co-operative Store Ltd. Vs. R.S. Gu ...

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

R.N. Mittal, President: 1. This revision petition has been filed by the opposite party against the order of the District Forum dated 3rd June, 1993 by which they have been directed to pay an amount of Rs. 5,000/- alongwith interest @12% p.a. from 1-6-84 to the date of payment and Rs. 1,000/-as compensation to the complainant. 2. Briefly the facts are that the complainant deposited Rs. 5,000/- with the opposite party on 29-4-91 in a scheme providing interest 12% p.a. He received interest upto 1-6-84 and thereafter, no interest was paid to him by the opposite party. Consequently he filed a complaint before the District Forum for refund of the amount and interest on that amount. The opposite party contested the complaint and denied their liability to pay the amount. 3. The District Forum decreed the claim of the complainant as mentioned above. The opposite party has filed a revision petition against the said order to this Commission. 4. The learned Counsel for the respondent raised an obj...

Krishna and Another Vs. Delhi Development Authority

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

Dr. A.N. Saxena, Member: 1. Briefly the facts of the case are that the Delhi Development Authority floated a scheme for allotment of shops/ stalls for the Schedule Castes/Schedule Tribes category. The complainant belonging to the Schedule Caste category applied for allotment under the said scheme vide application No. 8669 dated 15.3.88 and deposited the earnest money of Rs. 2,000/-. The complainant was declared successful in the draw of lots of allotment under this scheme which was held on 12.8.88. She was issued by the respondent an intimation-cumdemand letter dated 22.11.88 calling upon her to deposit 25% of the reserve price of the shops/ stalls amounting to Rs. 33,600/- together with documentation charges, annual ground rent, maintenance charges amounting to Rs. 36,660/- within 60 days together with necessary documents. The complainant complied with these requirements and deposited the said amount of Rs. 36,660/- on 18.1.89 alongwith an application stating that the necessary docume...

K.R. Enterprises Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)LC158Tri(Delhi)

1. This appeal arises out of an adjudication order passed by the Additional Collector of Customs, Madurai, dated 20-9-1988. Facts, briefly, are that the appellants, herein, imported the consignment for which the bill of entry declaring the goods to be wool waste was filed at the Tuticorin Port on 4-7-1988. The goods were cleared on being classified under sub-heading 5103.10, Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as wool wate. The department's case is that on subsequent detailed examination of the representative samples drawn from the consignment, the goods were found to be wool yarn in spool form. The department also noted the Bombay Customs House Public Notice No. 60 dated 8-6-1988 saying that the bases of wool yarn should not be more than 30 Cms. (12 inches) long for qualifying for assessement as shoddy wool. The imported consignment by the appellants was not found to be in accordance with this specification. A show cause notice dated 23-8-1988 was issued charging appellants with misdeclaring wo...

Somaiya Organic (India) Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1994)LC118Tri(Delhi)

1. The issue for determination in this appeal is the eligibility or otherwise of the appellants to the benefit of the money credit scheme in terms of Notification No. 231/87 dated 1-10-1987 issued Under Rule 57K of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for "Solvent-75" and Paraldehyde manufactured by the appellants - according to the Department the benefit is not available as these two final products are not specified as such in the notification while according to the appellants the two products are only wastes or by-products and not final products or alternately, once acetaldehyde is manufactured and entitled to the benefit of the scheme, its further polymerisation into paraldehyde cannot disentitle it from the above benefit.2. We have heard Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, learned Advocate and Shri M.M.Mathur, learned JCDR.3. Under the provisions of Notification No. 231/87 certain finished excisable goods referred to as final products such as Acetaldehyde, Butanol, Acetone, etc. have been specified...

State (Delhi Administration) Vs. Prem Chand Lambu and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 53(1994)DLT778

Y.K. Sabharwal, J.(1) The respondents and two accused were tried for offences under Section 399 and Section 402 IPC. Respondents, Prem Chand, Satnam Singh and Rajbir Singh were also tried for an offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act. The brief facts leading to the trial of these respondents are these: (2) On 19th May, 1975 Inspector Amarjit Singh working in Special Staff, East District received a secret information at 6 p.m. that dacoits headed by Prem Chand alias Lambu would be committing dacoity during that night at about 2 a.m. in Maujpur Gonda while armed with illegal arms. The informer was directed by Inspector Amarjit Singh to again confirm the information and ascertain the number of dacoits and the place of their assembly etc. The information was brought to the notice of the superior officers. The informer again came to the Office of the Special Staff at 10.30 p.m. and informed that the information given by him earlier was correct and that the gang of dacoits headed by Lambu ...

Raman Mahajan Vs. the State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1994IAD(Delhi)838; 54(1994)DLT50; 1994(28)DRJ636

V.B. Bansal, J.(1) Raman Mahajan has moved this application for bail for the offences punishable under Section 498-A and 304-B Indian Penal Code in case F.LR. No. 221 of 1993, P.S.Anand Vihar. Delhi. Challan against the petitioner and his mother Smt.Mohini Mahajan has already been Filed in the Court of the Ilaqa Metropolitan Magistrate. (2) Briefly stated the case of the prosecution has been that on 17.8.1993 at 11.50 a.m., Dd No. 6A was recorded at P.S. Anand Vihar, on the basis of an information given on telephone by some unknown person about one lady having committed suicide at House No. 32, Ram Vihar. A copy of this D.D. entry was given to Asi Surinder Pal, who along with Const. Subhash Chand, went to the spot. Information was also conveyed to the S.D.M. as also the S.H.O. (3) Accordingly, the S.H.O.and S I.Vijay Pal Singh besides other officials reached the spot and found the dead body of Vandana. The spot was inspected by the Crime team and statement of Smt.Prem Lata wife of Shri...

Ramji Lal Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 53(1994)DLT829

Jaspal Singh, J.(1) On 8th December, 1983 Kalpana, was 3-' years old. On that day, when she came back from school she started crying and told her mother that Ramji Lal, who is the appellant before us, had molested her. The mother, alarmed by what her daughter had told her, narrated the incident to her husband who on 10th December, 1983 went to the school, met Mr.D.S.Dalal, who was managing the school and informed him of the incident. That very day the appellant was arrested and Kalpana was sent to a hospital where she was examined and a small laceration was found over 'post fourchette'. After investigation challan was put in under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and it was for that offence that the appellant was tried. Ultimately he was convicted under Sections 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment. Aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and the order of sentence he preferred this appeal. (2) Mr. Rajiv Aw...