Delhi Court February 1996 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
K.M.A. Ltd. and Another Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1996
Reported in: [1996]86CompCas725(Delhi)
Dr. M. K. Sharma J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated July 22, 1994, passed by the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (in short, 'the AAIFR') upholding and affirming the order passed by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (in short, 'the BIFR') holding that the reduction in the value of share of K. M. A. Ltd. was required in order to revive the company under the sanctioned scheme and accordingly, directing for transfer of shareholding of the existing promoters and their associate holders at the rate of Re. 1 for each share. 2. Originally, this petition was preferred by K. M. A. Ltd. and Mr. Ashish Kamani as petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 respectively. After notice was served on the respondents and on an objection taken by respondents Nos. 4 and 5 stating that the BIFR had restrained the second petitioner from acting on behalf of the first petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner made a request to this cour...
Apari Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1996
Reported in: 1996IAD(Delhi)887; 1996CriLJ3941; 61(1996)DLT844
M.S.A. Siddiqui, J.(1) The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a writ of Habeas Corpus to direct the respondents to produce her minor children namely Dhanna, Sardariya and Kalu, alleged to have been kidnapped on 22.8.92 and 23.12.94 respectively. In response to the notice issued to the respondents, Dharmendra Kumar, Deputy Commissioner of Police (South District) filed his counter affidavit dated 10.7.94 stating therein that on 23.12.94, the petitioner lodged a report at the police post Nehru Place (P.S. Kalkaji) to the effect that her son Kalu had been missing for the last 20 days. Consequently, D.D. No. 13 dated 23.12.94 was recorded and the same was entrusted to Head Constable Rajendra for inquiry. On inquiry, it was revealed that Kalu was last seen near fly over, Chiragh Delhi where he used to sell newspapers. It is further stated that after institution of the present writ petition, two cases being F.I.R. No. 2335/9...
Sham Lal and Co. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1996
Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT1060TriDel
1. These 13 appeals arise out of a common order passed by Collector (Appeals) dismissing the present appellant's appeals filed against 13 separate orders of the Assistant Collector. We have heard both sides.2. These appeals relate to import of dry fruits such as green and black raisins, apricot, almonds, abjosh and dry figs. At the relevant time duty was ad valorem on apricot and dry figs and was specific in regard to the other commodities. The Assistant Collector did not accept the transaction value in all these cases and adopted the highest value of the season and arrived at the assessable value for the purpose of debiting to the import licence of the appellant. It was thus found that the enhanced value exceeded the value of the licence produced in respect of each Bill of Entry. Therefore the goods were confiscated.However, the Assistant Collector fixed redemption fine in each of the cases and also levied penalty in each of the cases. The Collector (Appeals) gave relief in respect o...
Pooja Forge Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1996
Reported in: (1996)(84)ELT37TriDel
1. In this appeal, there has been imposition of confiscation fine of Rs. 40,000/- and penalty of Rs. 5,000/- under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944 on the allegation that the goods had not been accounted in the RG-1 register in respect of goods manufactured on 9-11-1992 and found lying in the finished room by the officials raiding the premises on the morning of 10-111992. The allegation in short is that on physical verification carried out of the finished goods in the factory in respect of goods nuts, bolts and screws, it was found to be in excess than the recorded balance in RG-1 register. The statement of Shri Manish Aggarwal was also recorded who admitted the excess stock of finished goods than the recorded balance of RG-1 register. Therefore, the department alleged contraventions of Rule 173G and 226 of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The appellants in reply to the show cause notice took a specific stand that the goods had not reached RG-1 stage, as they were still in unpacked ...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Pace Dry Air Corpn.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1996
Reported in: (1996)(83)ELT447TriDel
1. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue being aggrieved with the Order-in-Appeal dated 10-9-1985 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay.2. The matter relates to the classification of the product 'Air Dryer' for industrial use whether under Item 29A(i) or under Item No. 68 of the erstwhile First Schedule of the Central Excise Tariff. The Collector (Appeals) had held it to be classifiable under Item 68.Revenue had come in appeal on the ground that the product is a Refrigerating appliances and was correctly classifiable under Item 29A(i).3. We have heard Shri Gopal Prasad, learned Advocate for the respondents and Shri G.D. Sharma, learned JDR for the appellant/Revenue.4. Shri G.D. Sharma, learned JDR referred to the product's literature and submitted that product works on refrigeration system. It chills the air and manufacturer had also referred it as Air refrigerated dryer.Referring to the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), he mentioned tha...
Modipon Ltd. Vs. Collector of Centrl Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1996
Reported in: (1996)(84)ELT323TriDel
1. The appellants have challenged the confirmation of duty amount of Rs. 38,587.41 in respect of alleged clandestine removal of 52 cartons of Nylon filament yarn and polyester yarn. As a result of the allegations made in the show cause notice, the Collector has also imposed a penalty of Rs. 40,000/- under the various provisions of Central Excise Rules.3. The short facts which lead to the proceedings are that the officers visited the appellants' factory on 26-9-1988 and checked stocks of finished excisable goods as also records maintained by the said unit.It is stated in the show cause notice hat stocks were found stored in 10 store rooms, the local Range Superintendent and his staff were also called to associate with the Officers of HP I Branch. The factory was working under physical control and they were said to have maintained EB-4 registers. The finished stock (including the finished production of 25-9-1988) was checked with the physically available stock in the Bonded Store Rooms ...
State Bank of India Vs. Sanjeev Malik and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1996
Reported in: AIR1996Delhi284; ILR1996Delhi1b
ORDERM. Jagannadha Rao, C. J.1. This isan appeal against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 8-10-1995 in I.A. No. 338/ 95 in Suit No. 635-A/84. The suit was one filed under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act. It was filed by the 1 st respondent. Mr. Prabhat Chand.2. Prabhat Chand (plaintiff-1 st respondent),Smt. Kamla Devi (1 st defendant) and Miss ManjuAggarwal (3rd kdefendant) were partners ofM/s. S.C.S. Publishers Distributors, under a deeddated 1-3-1977, having equal shares. It appearsthat the plaintiff, after serving notices dated 24-5-1983 and 11-9-1983, offered to retire from thefirm and also sent reply notice dated 23-9-1983on the defendants calling upon them to finalisethe accounts and render the Same to the plaintiffand pay his dues from the assets, goodwill andprofits. On failure by the defendant, the plaintiffmoved an application under Section 20 of theArbitration Act. According to Ihe plaintiff, hisshare in the assets and goodwill was Rs. 2,50lakhs plus interest...
Kellogg Company Vs. PravIn Kumar Bhadabhai and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1996
Reported in: 1996(36)DRJ509
M. Jagannadha Rao, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff, Kellogg Company against the order of the learned single Judge in is 2094/94 in Suit 432/94 dated 31.10.1995. By that order, the learned Single Judge dismissed the application of the appellant for grant of temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 CPC against the respondent. The dispute pertains to trade mark, emphasis being on trade dress. Though reference is made in the grounds of appeal to the carton being a piece of artistic work within Section 2(c) of the Copyright Act, arguments were mainly focussed on 'trade dress'. 2. The appellant Kellogg's Company sells Corn Flakes with cartons which describe the cartons as 'Kellogg's CORN FLAKES' (the original and the best). The respondent is selling corn flakes using a carton more or less similar in size but with the title 'AIMS ARISTO CORN FLAKES' written just at the place where appellant's display the words 'Kellogg's CORN FLAKES'. This is done at the left hand top of the carto...
Hans Raj Vs. Delhi Development Authority and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1996
Reported in: 62(1996)DLT577
S.D. Pandit, J. (1) The present petition is filed by Shri Hansraj, sole proprietor of Hansraj Construction Company to direct the respondent No. 3, S. Nagrajan to produce the award and proceedings of the award and to make the award the Rule of the Court. (2) The work of 960 Janta houses in Block-IV, Lawrence Road, Delhi was awarded by respondents 1 & 2 to the petitioner by Agreement No. 11/EE-HDV/ A/81-82. As regards the said work certain disputes had arisen between the parties and as per the agreement between the parties respondent No. 3. Mr. S. Nagrajan was appointed as the sole Arbitrator. The said Arbitrator entered upon reference on 16.7.87 and published his Award on 27.11.1990. (3) After the petitioner had filed the present petition notices were served on respondents 1 to 3. In pursuance of the notice served on defendant No. 3, defendant No. 3 filed his award and proceedings of arbitration in the Court and, thereafter, the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 filed IA. 3055/91 under Sections 30 ...
Ram Niwas Gupta Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1996
Reported in: 63(1996)DLT753
M.K. Sharma, J. (1) This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority imposing on the petitioner a penalty of reduction to the lower post of Upper Division Clerk in pursuance of a departmental proceeding and also against the order passed by the Appellate Authority on 1.4.1977 rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner.(2) A departmental proceeding was instituted against the petitioner with five charges leveled against him. After the petitioner showed cause and his defense was not found adequate, an Enquiry Officer was appointed to go into the charges, on completion of which the Enquiry Officer submitted his report on 19.9.1974 holding that the charges No. 1, 2,3 and 5 have been proved against the petitioner. As regards charge No. 4, the Enquiry Officer held that it had been proved to the extent that the petitioner raised a loan of Rs. 7,000.00 and Rs. 8,500.00, without any prior permission of the Competent Authority. The aforesaid report of the Enq...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »