Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1995Delhi172; 1994RLR483
ORDERD. K. Jain, J.1. By these two applications made under O.9, R. 13 read with S. 151 of the Civil P. C. first being main andthe other styled as supplementary application, the respondent-management seeks setting aside of ex parte judgment delivered onOct. 30, 1991 whereby petitioner-workman's writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, assailing the award dt. Oct. 29, 1988 given by the Labour Court against him andseeking its reversal was allowed, the awardwas set aside and it was held that thepetitioner was entitled to re-instatement withall back wages and other consequentialbenefits. 2. The grounds taken up in the two applications, seeking recalling of the impugned judgment dt. Oct. 30, 1991, succinctly stated, are:-- (i) that the matter used to be Shown on the list of DB-VII but suddenly appears to have been transferred from DB-VII to DB-V from Oct. 28, 1991 onwards, which fact was not noticed by Gopal Singh, the Court clerk of Dr. Anand Prakash, Sr. Adv. whose duty was to scr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1994IIIAD(Delhi)1251; 1995CriLJ163; 55(1994)DLT483; 1994(30)DRJ566; 1994RLR549
Dalveer Bhandari, J. (1) The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the legality of the order of the Metropolitan Magistrate summoning the petitioner on the basis of complaint filed by the complainant under Sections 420 and 120B, of the Indian Penal Code. (2) Brief facts necessary to dispose of this petition are recapitulated hereinunder. Respondent No.1 filed a complaint under Sections 420 and 120B, against the petitioners in December, 1992. In the complaint, it is incorporated that the complainant had been in search of a match for his daughter Ms. Poonam. The complainant came across the matrimonial advertisement in Hindustan Times daily (English) dated 26th March, 1989. In pursuance of that advertisement, negotiations were carried on. Accused no.3, the father of the boy sent a reply. The advertisement showed that the boy was a divorcee. There was no mention of any child from the first marriage. The advertisement is reprod...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1995)LC123Tri(Delhi)
1. When the matter was called for hearing the stay application, learned advocate for the applicants was enquired about the clearance from the Committee of Secretaries in pursuance of the directions of the Supreme Court in the case of ONGC v. CCE, Vadodara -1992 (61) E.L.T. 3. The learned advocate drew our attention to Ministry of Mines, Govt. of India's letter No. 8(5)/93-Met. I dated 6th August, 1993 addressed to the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the appellant Company. The letter has been signed by a Section Officer in the said Ministry. For better appreciation we reproduce the same :-No. 8(5) /93-Met. I New Delhi, the 6th August, 1993ToSub : Appeal by NALCO against the order of Collector of Central Excise, Bhubaneswar, regarding charging of duties of Twin Hoppers etc.Sir, I am directed to inform you that the Committee of Secretaries in its meeting held on 16th July, 1993 has agreed to permit NALCO to file an appeal before CEGAT against Order No. 42 (8417) CE-11A/91-COLLR-11/92, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1994IIIAD(Delhi)1309; 1994(3)Crimes732; 55(1994)DLT597; 1994(30)DRJ555
Dalveer Bhandari, J. (1) The petitioner has filed this revision petition under section 397 of the Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 20.12.1979 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge dismissing the petitioner's appeal under section 374 of the Cr.P.C. and upholding judgments dated 18.10.1978 and 23.10.1978 respectively of the Court of Mr. P.K. Dham, Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi by which the petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offence under section 411 of the Indian Penal Code . and directed him to undergo R.I. for one year. (2) Brief facts necessary to dispose of this petition are recapitulated: On 13.7.1974, a theft took place in the House numbering 1135, Chhata Madan Gopal belonging to Basant Lal (Public Witness 4) in which Rs.9,000.00 in cash, one golden necklace, one golden ring and four nose pins were stolen. Basant Lal lodged a report with the police on 17.7.1974. On 20.7.1974 the petitioner was arrested by the police and in pursuance of disclosure statement made by ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1994)(54)LC317Tri(Delhi)
1. The issue to be decided in these two appeals is the eligibility of the sump pumps manufactured by M/s Modi Industries Private Limited, the appellants to the benefit of notification 5778-CE dated 1st March, 1978, The notification exempts "power driven pumps primarily designed for handling water" of the types specified in the Table from the whole of duty of excise. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise and the Additional Collector of Central Excise in the impugned orders had found that the literature relating to the pumps indicated that they were designed for handling water containing sand, mud, sludge, etc.; the advertisement published by the manufacturer described them as pumps for dewatering of building sites, tunnels and mines, for industry and agricultural and marine duties. Each of them, therefore, held that the pumps were not primarily designed to handle water and would not be eligible for the benefit of the notification. The order of the Assistant Collector having been co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1994IVAD(Delhi)225; 56(1994)DLT529
Devinder Gupta, J. (1) Despite service, respondents have not appeared this matter. Since the matter is short, we issue rule, D.B. and proceed to dispose the same. (2) By invoking urgency clause contained in Section 17 of the Land AcquisitionAct, 1894 (for short the 'Act'), property of the petitioner was acquired through notification issued under Sections 4,6 and 17 of the Act on 27.7.1984 and within days after the publication the petitioners were dispossessed. It is the petition encase that without serving any notice on them and in their absence award was macon 7.3.1985. It was neither filed in the office of the Collector, Land Acquisition nor had they any knowledge about the same. After making of the award, no notice;is required under Sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Act was issued. It was in the month of June/July 1985 that petitioners acquired knowledge that some award had been made by the Collector. It was only an intimation received by them of making an award and not about the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1994)(74)ELT54TriDel
1. The above appeal arises out of the order of the Addl. Collector of Customs, Calcutta confiscating a consignment of 40,000 kgs. of completely pre-mutilated synthetic rags imported by the appellants against Additional Import Licence, with an option to redeem the same on payment of a fine of Rs. 3,15,000/- and imposing a penalty of Rs. 78,000/- on the appellants, on the ground of contravention of ITC Public Notice No. 122/89 and ITC Order No. 52/89, both dated 28-4-1989, according to which, import of the subject goods was permissible only through the ports of Bombay, and Delhi ICD.2. Shri M.K. Jain, learned Chartered Accountant, appearing on behalf of the appellants, submits that the issue in the appeal is covered in favour of the importer by the judgment dated 1-2-1994 of the Division Bench of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Kalindi Woollen Mills Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (Appeal No. 384/90 and Matter No.3145/89) holding that the Public Notice and ITC order are witho...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1994(30)DRJ669
R.C. Laholi, J. (1) This order dispossess of I.A. 6279/94, an application under order 39 Rules 1-2 Cpc seeking grant of ad interim injunction restraining the operation of letters/memos dated 31.5.94 issued by Shri A.S. Sarin President of the Central Secretariat Club, defendant No.2 against the plaintiffs and also restraining the holding of the Annual General Meeting of the Central Secretariat Club scheduled to be held on 26.6.94. This Court has stayed the Agm scheduled to beheld on 26.6.94. The date having already passed, the second relief has become practically redundant. It is the first relief that is now the core of controversy. (2) The Central Secretariat Club (Regd) (hereinafter referred to as the Club, for short) is a voluntary organisation. Its members primarily consist of employees of Central Secretariat of the Govt of India, though the membership is open to a few others aswell. It is governed by a Constitution. Here itself it Would be apposite to extract and reproduce a few re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1994)(73)ELT925TriDel
1. This appeal arises from the order-in-Appeal dated 29-1-1993 passed by the Collector (Appeals), Bombay.2. The question that arises for determination in this appeal is the correct classification of the product described as "ROVIMIX - Stay C(L Ascorbyl-2 Polyphosphate)". The lower authority had held that this product is not premix but are derivatives of Vitamin C, and therefore, held it to be classifiable under sub-heading 2936.27 of the CTA, 1975, as derivatives of Vitamin C and not under sub-heading 2309.00 of the CTA, 75, as premixes meant for use in animal feed.3. The ld. Collector has noted in his order the report of the Deputy Chief Chemist vide TO. No. 250 dated 12-10-1992 and the literature relied by the importer and basing on the said material has held that the goods are not premix and hence not classifiable as a preparation of a kind, used in the animal feed.4. When the case came up for hearing, the appellant has sent in their written submission and has desired their case to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1994IIIAD(Delhi)1517; 1994(30)DRJ589
R.C. Lahoti, J.(1) This order shall dispose of I.A. NO. 15022/91 and 15023/91 filed respectively under rule 4 and rule 3(5) of Order 37 of the Civ (2) A brief resume of the relevant facts. The plaintiff tiled this suit with the allegations that it had supplied goods worth Rs. 22,11,261.00 to the defendants. An amount of Rs. 19,33,851.00 was paid by the defendant to the plaintiff. The balance amount of Rs. 2,77,410.00 remained outstanding. The defendant had issued three cheques worth Rs. 2,08,820.00 to the plaintiff in part payment of the outstanding balance. The cheques were dishonoured on being presented to the bank for payment. The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 2,77,410.00 with interest calculated at the rate of 23% p.a. making a total of Rs. 5,47,181.00 . It was a summary suit under order 37 CPC. The defendants having been noticed made appearance and filed their address for service. Summons for judgment was issued to the defendant on the address given by them. It was th...
Tag this Judgment!