Delhi Court September 1996 Judgments

Faraz Rizvi Vs. University of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1996VAD(Delhi)213; 1996(39)DRJ304

C.M. Nayar, J. (1) Heard learned counsel for the parties.(2) The present petition is directed against respondents 2 and 3 for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the list dated July 8, 1996 which relates to provisional admission in BUMS/BAMS Course for the current academic year as the petitioner is alleged to have been wrongly excluded. The said impugned list is filed as Annexure P-3 to the writ petition.(3) 'THE petitioner passed the Intermediate Examination of Intermediate Board, U.P. in the year 1993 with 93.6 per cent marks in P.C.B.( Physics, Chemistry and Biology). The marks sheet filed as Annexure P-1 to the writ petition reads as follows: Anukramank Name of Candidate Varg Kramank 0824982 Faraz Rizvi B1 D19433 Name of School Centre Pariksha Sanstha Pravarg Vyaktigat Mnintlcoll Saraighasi Full Exam Private Bulandshahr ___________________________________________________________________________ SubjectMaxi.PassMarksobtainedTotalGrossTotalandResult ________________________...

Y.P. Vij Vs. State (Central Bureau of Investigation)

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1997(1)Crimes405; 64(1996)DLT611

N.G. Nandi, J.(1) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the proceedings pending before Special Judge, Delhi in Cc No. 49(A)/88/DLI dated 28.9.88 mainly on the ground that the prosecution has not obtained the sanction to prosecute this petitioner/accused and that the proceedings under Section 120B, Indian Penal Code and Sections 7/13(l)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act are liable to be quashed for want of sanction to prosecute. (2) It has been submitted by learned Counsel for respondent/CBI that the challan had been filed against one Ishwar Chand on 3.7.89 for the aforesaid offences and the order issuing summons against him was passed on 3.7.89. It is suggested that at that pointoftime,thispetitionerwasnotarrayedastheaccsued and his name was shown in Column-2 of the charge- sheet Along with two other public servants. Subsequently, this accused ca me on the scene and by order dated 21.9.93 summons were ordered to be...

Ramesh Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1997CriLJ645; 70(1997)DLT394

Arun Kumar, J.(1) This judgment will dispose of four appeals filed by the four accused who were tried together and convicted by a learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi vide impugned judgment dated 29th April, 1993 for offences under Sections 147/302/149, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment for offence under Sections 302/149, Indian Penal Code and a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 each and for six months R.I. for offence under Sections 147/149, IPC. In fact there were five accused allegedly involved in the incident. The trial of one of them, namely, Manglu was separated because he was entitled to be tried under the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. (2) Briefly the facts are that deceased Kishori used to run a tea stall in front of the shop of Rajan Katyal Public Witness Public Witness 1 at 83, Chitragupta Road. Delhi. On the night between 10th and 11th June, 1991 at about 2 a.m., Kishori was allegedly beaten by the five accused as a result of which he fell unconscious. Mahender Mandal Pub...

Balwinder Singh Vs. Union of India

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1996VAD(Delhi)257; 64(1996)DLT385; 1996(39)DRJ96

Devinder Gupta, J.(1) The petitioner while posted as a Sepoy Driver Mt at Central Ammunition Depot (for short 'CAD'), Pulgaon was charged for offence under Section 69 of the Army Act in having committed Civil Offence, namely, murder contrary to Section 302 of Indian Penal Code on 10.1.1990 by causing death of L/Nk Driver P.K. Chaudhary and that of Sepoy Driver Siva Prasad and attempt to murder, contrary to Section 307 Indian Penal Code, at Pulgaon Camp on 10.1.1990 by running over squad of unit persons by driving one Ton Army vehicle with intent to murder them resulting in injury to fourteen individual Sepoy Drivers. (2) On a trial by General Court Martial the petitioner was convicted on 4.10.1990 and was sentenced to suffer death by being hanged by neck until dead. The findings of 'guilty' and sentence 'to suffer death by being hanged by the neck until he be dead' was duly confirmed on 24.4.1992 by the Central Government. The petitioner's statutory petition under Section 164(2) of the...

The Collector of Stamps Vs. Hemlata and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 64(1996)DLT450

Manmohan Sarin, J.(1) The appellant, aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge allowing Civil Writ Petition No 687196 and directing it reassess the duty payable on the disclosed consideration of Rs. 10,000 in the conveyance deed, has filed the present appeal. The appellant's case is that the admitted consideration in the entire transaction, is Rs. 5,61,000 on which stamp duty is liable to be paid.(2) The facts leading to the filing of the present appeal may be noticed in brief : (i) Delhi Development Authority had granted a lease of 3.65 acres of land situated in Mayur Vihar, Phase-I, New Delhi to the respondent No. 2, Mis. Parvana Cooperative Group Housing Society Limited, for construction of flats for its members. In the event, flat No. A-37 was allotted by respondent No. 2 to two of its members, viz. P. K. Roy and Pranab K. Roy, (hereinafter referred to as the 'original allottees'). (ii) The aforesaid original allottees entered into an agreement to sell with respondent No. ...

Sigma Electronics Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)LC929Tri(Delhi)

1. M/s. Sigma Electronics, Jaipur, M/s. Sagar Electronics and M/s.Vikas Watch Manufacturing Company are engaged in the manufacture and assembly of various items including Electronic Calculators, Digital Electronic watches and Modules thereof, Electronic clocks etc. for which purpose they imported various items such as BC Micro Motors, Button cells, Modules of Digital watches, Metal Bezels fitted with glass and Metal straps, components of clock movements.2. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence had gathered intelligence to the effect that contraband goods are being smuggled by mis-declaration and under-valuation by one Shri Vasudev Moolrajani, in the names of the above-mentioned firms. Enquiries by the department at the declared address of M/s Sigma Electronics and M/s. Sagar Electronics had revealed that no company existed at the given addresses. Therefore, on receipt of intelligence that few shipments consigned to the firms had landed at Air Cargo Complex, Delhi, officers of the DR...

Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(89)ELT123TriDel

1. The two appeals involve the same issue and were argued together by the learned Senior Advocate Shri A.N. Haksar who appeared for the appellants along with learned Advocate Shri R. Sudhinder and by Shri K.K. Jha, learned Senior Departmental Repre- sentative who appeared for the respondent Collector. This common order disposes of both the appeals.2. The appellants have filed these two appeals challenging Order-in- Original No. 11/CEX/ADC/91, dated 28-2-1991 passed by Additional Collec- tor of Central Excise, Chandigarh and Order No. 8/CE/1992, dated 14-8-1992 passed by Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh. Both these authorities had held in their respective orders that the appellants were liable to pay Central Excise duty on crushed stones under Tariff Heading 2505.00 and steel ribs under Tariff Heading 7308.90. The amounts of duty confirmed and the penal- ties imposed were as follows :- (1) Order passed by Additional Collector dealt with in Appeal No. E/1601/91B: Shri A.N. Haksar...

Component Corpn. Vs. Cc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(68)LC105Tri(Delhi)

1. Appellant claiming to be a manufacturer of photocopying machines, imported under OGL several consignments of toners, developers and photo conductor drums said to be either consumables or components of photocopying machines in the purported capacity as an actual user and declared certain values which were accepted and on that basis goods were cleared on payment of duty. Subsequent investigation showed that the appellant was not engaged in the manufacture of photocopying machines and was not an actual user of the imported articles and, therefore, there was violation of actual user conditions regarding consumables and drum (components) and also violation of requirement of specific licence in regard to the drum (component) which was a restricted item under item 470 of Appendix 3 Part A of 1985-88 Policy.Investigation also showed that there was gross undervaluation in the import documents. Investigation also showed that the invoices produced were not really by the Singapore supplier and...

itc Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. This is an appeal against the order of Collector (Appeals), Madras dated 3-9-1986.2. The Id. Counsel stated that the appellants imported tobacco cutting machine and claimed its classification under Heading 84.59(2). The Department however, classified it under Heading 84.59(1). They cleared the goods under protest and subsequently filed a refund claim. The Assistant Collector's order was upheld by the Collector (Appeals) in view of his interpretation of Heading 84.59(1). However it was there submission that he had erred in doing so.3. The Heading 84.59 as it stood during the relevant period reads as follows: "84.59 Machines and mechanical appliances, having individual functions, not falling within any other heading of this Chapter : (2) Machines and mechanical appliances designed for the production of a commodity, machinery for treating metals wood or similar materials, for stripping and cutting of tobacco leaf or for cutting or rolling tea leaves; machines for mounting card clothin...

Nogi and Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1996)(88)ELT369TriDel

1. The classification of "Chandrika Brahmi Hair Oil" manufactured by the appellants arises for determination in the present appeal - according to the appellants, the product is classifiable under T.I. 68 while the department's contention is that it is classifiable under T.I.14F(ii) of the Schedule to the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. The appellants have asked for a decision on merits and hence we have perused the records and heard the ld. DR and render our findings as below : The composition of the product as described by the Chemical Examiner is as under: "It is a preparation for care of hair-pleasant smelling hair oil containing added ingredients. The manufacturer had declared in the test memo, that the ingredients used as 'Brahmi Leaves and Mehandi Leaves, Nagarmotha, Amla, Kapoorkachri, coconut oil, Dhaniya and preservative." 68. Classification was being approved from time to time. However, w.e.f. 17-3-1985, it was proposed to classify the product as perfume under T.I. 14F(ii)....