Delhi Court January 1995 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1995 Page 8 of about 158 results (0.019 seconds)National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Harjeet Kaur and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: I(1995)ACC564; 1996ACJ687; 1995IAD(Delhi)882; 1995(32)DRJ281
C.M. Nayar, J. (1) The present appeal arises out of the judgment dated 29th October, 1987 of Mrs. Mamta Sehgal, Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, New Delhi. The respondents/claimants have filed their cross appeal (2385/88) claiming enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and interest @ 12% per annum on the amount claimed w.e.f. the date of filing of the claim application till realisation. The brief facts of the case are that the deceased Shri Balbinder Singh, aged 44 years was working as Officiating in charge of Kendriya Vidyalya, Sadiq Nagar, New Delhi drawing a salary of Rs. 2300.00 per month approximately. On 29.11.1983 at about 12.30 per month the deceased was returning to his house on his two wheeler scooter bearing No. Hps 3206 and when he reached the Mool Chand Hospital crossing he stopped his scooter as there was a red light signal. The truck bearing No. Dhl 6348 being driven by respondent 5 came at a fast speed from behind and hit the scooter with its front po...
Tag this Judgment!Wood Working Centre Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1996)(85)ELT201TriDel
1. This appeal arises out of Order-in-Appeal No. 125-CE/Appl/Ind/90, dated 17-5-1991 of Collector (Appeals) Indore under which the appellants, claim for refund of Rs. 83,206.90 has been rejected as time barred. Facts in brief are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of wooden articles and wooden furniture classified under erstwhile Tariff Item 68 to First schedule of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. They paid duty at the rate of 9% and 12% ad valorem during the period from 1-4-1985 to 5-12-1985. Subsequently M.P. Housing Board, the appellants controlling Board, wrote to Asstt. Collector on 16-5-1985 that the value of clearances during the period 1-4-1984 to 31-3-1985 did not exceed Rs. 75 lakhs and therefore their units would be entitled for exemption for first clearance of Rs. 20 lakhs. Further by letter dated 10-1-1986, the M.P. Housing Board wrote to the Collector of Central Excise, Indore regarding the refund.2. Ld. Advocate for the appellants submitted that t...
Tag this Judgment!Mahavir Singh Vs. D.T.C. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 57(1995)DLT465; 1995(32)DRJ379; 1995LabIC750; 1995RLR257
Anil Dev Singh, J. (1) This is a Letters Patent Appeal against the order of the learned single Judge dated May 12, 1994 whereby the writ petition of the appellant challenging the order of his termination was dismissed.(2) On October 22, 1984 the appellant was initially appointed as conductor (retainer crew) on daily wages. Subsequently, on June 27,1985 the appellant was appointed as conductor on probation with effect from April 22, 1985 on regular rate of pay. The period of probation was for one year but could be extended up to two years. However, before the expiry of the period of one year, on March 17,1986, the services of the appellant were terminated by an order of termination simplicities which said: 'THE services of Sh. Mahavir Singh, s/o Sh.Manglu Ram,(conduc- tor) B.No-22009 T.No-48502 of this unit are hereby terminated w.-f.l8.3.1986, under clause 9 (a) (i) of the DRTA (conditions of appointment and service) Regulations, 1952. HE is required to deposit all the D.T.C. articles ...
Tag this Judgment!Gurmit Singh Cheema Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)756; 1995(2)ALT(Cri)12; 1995CriLJ1705; 1995(2)Crimes568; 1995(32)DRJ369
Mohd. Shamim, J. (1) What light is to the eyes - what air is to the lungs What love is to the heart, liberty is to the soul of man. R.G. Ingersoll, Progress.(2) Liberty in fact is the very .breath of our being. It is inconceivable to think of a meaningful existence in the absence of liberty. That is why the framers of our Constitution thought it fit to secure for all the citizens of this country, liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship. In fact, the golden strand of liberty runs throughout the fabric of our Constitution.(3) The petitioner through the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has raised the question of his liberty, so vital to a man, as observed above, which he is alleged to have been illegally deprived of. He thus seeks the quashment of the order of detention dated January 20,1993 and the order of declaration No. 3/93 under Section 10(1) of the Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,...
Tag this Judgment!Lark Trading Co. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(76)ELT381TriDel
1. M/s. Lark Trading Co., Bombay have filed the present appeal against the order dated 3-10-1986 passed by the Collector of Customs (Airport), Bombay.2. The appellants had imported in August, 1986 - synthetic pyrethrum from Japan ostensibly on the strength of a letter of authority issued by M/s. Transelektra (referred to hereinafter in short as 'Trans'). The letter of credit (L/C) had been opened by the appellants themselves, who were not the actual users. It was alleged that the goods had been imported without a valid import license and without any registration under the provisions of the Insecticides Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1968'). It also appeared that the value of the goods imported had been misdeclared. The appellants waived the issue of show cause notice and wanted adjudication on the basis of the personal hearing only. The Collector of Customs (Airport), Bombay who adjudicated the matter found, vide his order-in-original dated 3-10-1986 (issued on 28-1...
Tag this Judgment!Capital Paper Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)(77)ELT412TriDel
1. Shri Rajesh Chhibber, learned Counsel for the appellants submits that the issue involved herein is the eligibility to Modvat credit in respect of Felt, Metal cloth and wire mesh used in the manufacture of final product, namely paper. The department has confirmed the demand by denying Modvat credit to the tune of Rs. 1,36,699.48p. for the period December 1992 to May 1994 on the ground that these items are tools and not eligible to the benefit of Modvat. The issue involved is the subject matter of dispute before the Larger Bench which is seized of the matter. It has been referred by the East Regional Bench in the case of Orient Paper Mills.2. Following the practice in such cases where two different views have been expressed by two different Benches and having regard to the fact that the matter is sub judice before the Larger Bench, we grant waiver of pre-deposit of duty and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal.Both the parties are at liberty to mention the matter before the Large...
Tag this Judgment!Paradip Oxygen Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1996)(85)ELT320TriDel
1. Appellants M/s. Paradeep Oxygen (P) Ltd., has commenced production of Oxygen Gas and D.A. Gas falling under Tariff Item 14H of the Central Excise Tariff for the first time in November, 1983. They availed of the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 83/83-C.E., dated 1-3-1983 during the period 1983-84 (November 1983 to March 1984) on submission of the necessary declaration. During the financial year 1984-85 they submitted the Classification List claiming the benefit of exemption as available under the Notification No. 83/83-C.E., dated 1-3-1983 as amended and specifically declared that their clearance value during the year 1984-85 would be Rupees 22 lakhs. They continued to avail exemption under the said Notification during the year 1984-85. On verification of the RT 12 returns for the period from April 1984 to December 1984 it was found that aggregate value of clearance of their product was more than the exemption limit provided under Notification No. 83/83-C.E., dated 1-3-19...
Tag this Judgment!Tunga Air Products (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1995)LC766Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal is against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay in which he has held inter alia that the appellant was not eligible for the benefit of Notification 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986 for the period prior to 6-2-1987.2. The appellant was not represented the hearing. Shri V.C. Bhartia, JDR supports the order of the Collector (Appeals).3. The appellant had filed a classification list from 9-9-1986 and had already approved by the Department on 1-10-1986. The appellant claimed that it did not avail exemption under the notification and paid duty at the effective rate on the goods cleared from 15-9-1986. Therefore, it was entitled to Modvat credit on the inputs in the manufacture of such goods.4. It is to be noted that the order of the Collector (Appeals) was dealing with an appeal from the order of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Sangli. The Assistant Collector, in his order, was dealing with the situation caused by the appellant filing a classif...
Tag this Judgment!Corporation Bank Vs. Montana International and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)629; 1995(32)DRJ458
Usha Mehra, J. (1) The plaintiff Corporation Bank filed this suit for recovery of Rs. 9,53,653.66 paise based on written contract under the provisions of Order xxxvii of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short Civil Procedure Code .). The suit has been filed on the basis of the bills amount due but not paid by .the defendants. The case of the plaintiff bank as set out in the plaint is that defendant No.1 M/s Montana International in the course of business dealing with the bank requested it to open Import letter of Credit for having the import of the desired merchandise from M/s Tejis International Pte.Ltd.On the basis of Said request of defendant No.1 through defendants 2 and 4, plaintiff bank opened an Import Letter of Credit favoring M/s Tejis International Pte.Ltd. to cover the import of 'five metric tonnes of Colombo Cloves'. Letter of Credit was opened through their correspondent M./S Marine; , Bank, Singapore, for negotiations. Last date of shipment of goods was 28th February,1984....
Tag this Judgment!State Through Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Ravinder Singh
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3428; 57(1995)DLT506; 1995(32)DRJ394
Vijender Jain, J.(1) This is a petition filed by the State under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 on behalf of the Central Bureau of Investigation for setting aside the order dated 21st July, 1992 passed by Special Judge under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (now amended in 1988). The main thrust of the arguments of Mr.S.Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that after Magistrate has recorded the evidence of PW-1 i.e. Mr.P.G.Gavai, who was a former Lt.Govemor of Delhi, the Special Judge ought to have finished the whole evidence of the State and could not have discharged the accused. Another argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that even if the said Mr.Gavai has deposed as a witness before the(2) Special Judge, the State could have produced other evidence to show that. the sanction was proper. Mr.Lal has vehemently contended that it was illegal on the part of the-Special Judge to have decided the question of sanction on the evidenc...
Tag this Judgment!