Delhi Court September 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.
Air Control and Chem. Engg. Co. Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-1996
Reported in: (1996)(88)ELT718TriDel
1. These are three appeals filed by M/s. Air Control & Chem. Engg. Co.Ltd. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of electric fans classifiable during the relevant time under Item No. 33 of the old Central Excise Tariff. Their fans were classifiable under sub-item (2) of Item No. 33 which covers industrial fans. They were bringing electric motors from outside and were invoicing them separately collecting higher amount from the customers than paid for such motors.In two appeals which had been disposed of by a common order by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), the cost of these motors did not form part of the final product. In the third appeal bearing No.E/387/87-A they had taken proforma credit in respect of the duty-paid electric motors, but did not include its cost while determining the assessable value of their final product and only reversed the credit taken on the electric motors. In all the three cases the duty demanded had been confirmed by the lower authorit...
Commr. of C. Ex. Vs. Cambridge Woollen Mills
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-1996
Reported in: (1996)(88)ELT387TriDel
1. By the reference application cited above, the Commissioner, Central Excise has prayed for reference to the Hon'ble High Court stating "Whether interest on delayed payment collected by the department which was admittedly not collected under the Central Excise Act 'as duty', the CEGAT has jurisdiction to decide such cases and that a statement of the case be drawn up and the question of law referred to the High Court." 2. The facts of the case are that the respondents herein were asked to pay shortfall of duty of Rs. 1,70,723.25 in the assessment Memo of the RT 12 return for the month of Jan., 1984. The respondents herein initially issued three cheques for covering the amount out of which only one cheque for Rs. 60,000/- was encashed. The others were dishonoured. Again subsequently, the respondents herein issued six more cheques towards the balance amount of which only four amounting to Rs. 50,0007- were encashed and the remaining two were returned for want of balance. The Asstt. Coll...
Paramjeet Singh Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-1996
Reported in: 1996IVAD(Delhi)588; 1997CriLJ522; 64(1996)DLT22; 1996(38)DRJ737
Arun Kumar, J. 1. The circumstances giving rise to this reference are that a learned single Judge of this Court has passed an order dated 30th April, 1996 in Crl.M.(M) No. 954 of 1995 to the effect that henceforth all the bail applications filed under Sections 438 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) should be dealt with by the Sessions Judge himself at the Tis Hazari Courts and by the respective Judges in charge at the Patiala House and the Karkardoma Courts. As a result of the said direction only the Sessions Judge, Delhi is hearing all the bail applications which are filed in the Sessions Court in the Tis Hazari Courts complex. Likewise the Judges in charge in the Patiala House Court complex and in the Karkardoma Court complex alone are hearings similar applications. This has naturally resulted in the bail applications getting piled up because only one Judge each has to hear and dispose of all the applications at the three Court complexes. ...
Raj Kumar Vs. Executive Engineer, Cpwd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-1996
Reported in: 64(1996)DLT150; 2003(39)DRJ15
Anil Dev Singh, J. (1) The award dated 6th September,1990 in the matter of arbitration between the petitioner and the Union of India was filed in this Court by the Arbitrator Sh. N.H. ChandWani, who was appointed as an Arbitrator, by the Chief Engineer, Cpwd, New Delhi, vide letter dated 12th January,1989 to decide disputes between the parties. (2) The first respondent awarded the contract for the construction of hostel for students and nurses at Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi,, to one P.D. Gupta, contractor. As the said contractor was not able to complete the work, the balance work was awarded to the petitioner by the second respondent (UOI). Disputes, however, arose between the petitioner on the one hand and the said respondents on the other and the former sought reference of the same to an arbitrator. Thereupon the Chief Engineer (NDZ-1) referred the following disputes raised' by the petitioner to the aforesaid arbitrator: '1.The contractor claims Rs. 8,00,000.00 on account of work ...
Manish Tanwar Vs. Principal, Rajdhani College and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-1996
Reported in: 1996VAD(Delhi)54; 63(1996)DLT906
C.M. Nayar, J. (1) RULE. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. (2) The present petition seeks direction to the respondents to admit the petitioner in B.A.(Pass) course First year in Rajdhani College, New Delhi, respondents 1 and 2 herein. (3) The petitioner applied for admission in the above said college by filling up the necessary form for the Session 1996-97. The date of birth of the p(4) The main contentions are that there is no upper age limit prescribed by the University of Delhi and the respondent college cannot refuse admission merely on the ground that the petitioner is over age by four months as on October 1,1996 and the cancellation, as a consequence, is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and unconstitutional. (5) Respondents 1 and 2 have filed their counter affidavit wherein it is admitted that the University Authorities have laid down only the minimum age of the students to be admitted in the first year in the college. The maximum age limit has not been prescribed. However...
S.P. Agarwal Vs. Delhi Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-02-1996
Reported in: 64(1996)DLT198; (1997)ILLJ285Del; 1996RLR483
C.M. Nayar, J. (1) The present petition is directed against the respondents, Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking (for short 'D.E.S.U.') for issuance of a writ of mandamus to promote the petitioner to the post of Additional General Manager with effect from August 31, 1994 and quash the promotion of respondent No. 5 to the same post. (2) The petitioner is a Chief Engineer (Electrical) with D.E.S.U. having joined as Assistant Engineer in the year 1962. The petitioner was thereafter promoted to the post of Executive Engineer in 1970, Superintending Engineer in 1981, Additional Chief Engineer in 1988 and Chief Engineer on regular basis in 1991. The organisation D.E.S.U. is headed by General Manager and has two Additional General Managers i.e. Additional General Manager (Technical-Distribution) and Additional General Manager (Technical-Generation) besides Administration. It is alleged that in August, 1994 there occurred a vacancy in Desu to the post of Additional General Manager (T-D). Since t...
Plasticians (India) Vs. Rakesh Cottage Industries
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-01-1996
Reported in: 64(1996)DLT126
S.K. Mahajan, J. 1. The plaintiffs, a partnership firm claiming themselves to be the prior user of trade mark 'Gopal' since about February 18, 1979 in respect of the mathematical instruments, geometry boxes, etc. has filed this suit for passing off of their trade mark and infringement of copyrights by the defendants. The allegations made by the plaintiffs are that they have been manufacturing the geometry boxes under the trade mark 'Gopal' which has a distinctive and unique characteristic, artistic work and design. The alleged distinctive features of the Plaintiff's trade mark include printing of the geometry box in multicolours, having a lake in the background with the stream flowing at the left top corner below the trade mark 'Gopal' while there are mountains appearing at the right top corner of the said box, below which is a tree. On the left side there was bushes and three lotus flowers in the lake. On the bottom right side of the box, the logo of the plaintiff, with the first word...
Akhtar HussaIn Vs. District and Sessions Judge
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-01-1996
Reported in: 1996IVAD(Delhi)618; 70(1997)DLT276; 2003(39)DRJ165
M. Jagannadha Rao, C.J. (1) In this writ petition, filed as a public interest case, the point that is raised is whether the second respondent Shri S.N. Aggarwal, Additional District Judge, is competent to deal with appeals under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act (hereinafter called the Act). A writ of quo warranto has been sought. The contention is that Shri S.N. Aggarwal is a Judicial Officer not having 10 years standing as a 'Judicial Officer' and that the learned District Judge, Delhi, could not have transferred the appeals to Shri S.N. Aggarwal. (2) Section 9 of the Act deals with appeals against the orders of the Estate Officer. It reads: 'SECTION 9. Appeals: (1) An appeal shall lie from every order, of the Estate Officer made in respect of any public premises under Section 5 or Section 5B or Section 5C to an appellate officer who shall be the District Judge of the district in which the public premises are situate or such other judicial offi...
Parimal Kumar Roy Vs. All India Institute of Medical Sciences and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-01-1996
Reported in: 64(1996)DLT313
Dalveer Bhandari, J. (1) This matter has been remanded to this Court by the Division Bench by its order dated 15th May, 1996 passed in L.P.A. No. 60/96. (2) I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length. (3) The petitioner is a sponsored candidate of the Government of West Bengal and is desirous of pursuing the M.D. Course in Medicine or Obstetrics and Gynaecology. The procedure for admission for sponsored candidates has been mentioned in the Prospectus for the course starting from January, 1996. The procedure has been set out in the judgment delivered in Cwp 994/96 on 22nd March, 1996. According to the procedure, the sponsored candidates are permanent employees of Central/State Government or the Armed Forces, They are sponsored by their respective Governments or defense forces. (4) For the first time in the January session of 1996, apart from the written examination (theory paper), viva voce test of 50 per cent marks was introduced for admission to the M.D. Course. Again ...
Har Charan Singh Kohli Vs. the Commissioner of Police and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-01-1996
Reported in: 1996IVAD(Delhi)748; 65(1997)DLT731
S.K. Mahajan, J.(1) On an information having been received by the police at Ps Vasant Vihar on22nd January, 1994 at about 5.00 p.m., the staff of the police station left for house N0. D-3/3122, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi and the dead bodies of Capt. Saranpal Kohli, his wife Smt. Rajesh Kohli and two sons, namely' Tegh Pratap Singh and Rana Pratap Singh aged about/years and 3 years respectively were found lying on the floor of the flat in two different rooms. On the statement made by the petitioner, case Fir No. 20/94 was registered and the investigation was entrusted to the then Sho, Ps Vasant Kunj. After investigation, the accused, namely. Ram Pal Singh Chauhan and Parminder Singh were arrested and trial for their having committed an offence punishable under Sections 302/392/382 with 120B, Indian Penal Code is now continuing in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge. After more than two years of the gruesome murder of the aforesaid four members of the family and after recording the st...