Delhi Court April 1997 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1997 Page 3 of about 170 results (0.020 seconds)Ram Chand Verma Vs. Delhi Development Authority and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1997IVAD(Delhi)161; 68(1997)DLT198
M.S.A. Siddiqui, J. (1) The petitioner was allotted plot No. 111, Block E, in Malviya Nagar Extension Residential Scheme, New Delhi. Thereafter the respondent No. 1 cancelled the allotment arbitrarily. Aggrieved by the said action the petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226. On 27.5.1981 the petitioner obtained a stay order from this Court against cancellation and dispossession. It is alleged that inspire of the stay order the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 allotted the said plot to the respondent No. 5 who had in turn transferred the same to the respondent No. 4. It is further alleged that the respondents have contumaciously disobeyed the stay order dated 27th May, 1981 by allotting the plot to the respondent 5 and thus they are liable to be punished under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. (2) On this petition a Rule was issued by this Court on 8.2.1989 calling upon the respondents to show cause why they should not be dealt with for contempt for the alleged violation of the...
Tag this Judgment!National Capital Territory of Delhi Vs. Bhupinder Singh Chaudhry
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1997IVAD(Delhi)16; 1997(4)Crimes37; 70(1997)DLT317; 1997(42)DRJ226; 1997RLR618
J.K. Mehra, J.(1) In this petitioner and in the connected Revision No. 164/97, National Capital Territory of Delhi and Central Bureau of Investigation respectively have challenged the same order passed by the Special Judge in C.C. No. 91/96 dated 7.12.1996 quashing criminal proceedings against the respondent in Rc 16 (A)/92-DLI under Sections 120B, 409 Indian Penal Code and 13 (2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.(2) In brief, the facts of the case are as under:- The respondent who is a member of Delhi Higher Judicial Service held the post of Secretary, Law and Judicial, National Capital Territory of Delhi till 28.2.1990 and was also appointed, inter-alia, as Administrator General under Section 3 of the Administrator General Act, 1963. The Deputy Administrator General was supposed to assist the Administrator General. After affording repeated opportunities to Mr. Kazim Ali Khan for handing over the charge, he failed to hand over the charge and consequ...
Tag this Judgment!Virender Singh Pappu Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1997IIIAD(Delhi)861; 1997CriLJ3098; 67(1997)DLT73; 1997(42)DRJ65
N.G. Nandi, J.(1) The appellant stands convicted for the offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code . by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi in Sessions Case No.61/89, F.I.R. No.132/86, P.S. Mayapuri, New Delhi.(2) The facts leading to the filing of the present appeal, shortly stated are, that on 20.6.1989 at about 5.40 a.m., a telephonic information was received at Police Station Mayapuri, New Delhi that in burnt condition one girl is lying in the public park behind Syndicate Bank near Lajwanti Chowk; that on this information, Dd No.17A was recorded and the police persons went to the spot i.e. Salvage Park opposite House No. WZ-347, Nangal Rai, where a girl who disclosed her name as Champa was found lying with extensive burns on her body; that thereafter she was removed to Safdarjang Hospital; that S.D.M., New Delhi was contacted who came to the hospital and recorded the statement of Champa; that Champa told the S.D.M. that in the morning she had gone to fetch water from...
Tag this Judgment!Sudesh Ponnappa Vs. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1997IIIAD(Delhi)731; 68(1997)DLT889; 1997(43)DRJ359
Dalveer Bhandari, J. (1) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition with the following prayers: (I)'setting aside the letter dated 5th March, 1990 and consequently quashing the action of the respondents in putting the petitioner in the category of Garde Iii Stenographer; (ii) declare the petitioner entitled to be regularised as Private Secretary from the date of her appointment to the said post with all consequential benefits such as arrears of pay and allowances, seniority, promotion benefits to which the petitioner would be entitled had she been appointed as regular employee from that date; (iii) directing the respondents to regularise the petitioner to the post of Private Secretary with effect from 17th September, 1986 with all consequential benefits.(2) During the pendency of this petition, the petitioner has joined service with the World Bank and she is no longer interested in regularisation to the post of Private Secretary with the respondent thereforee she has confined her ...
Tag this Judgment!Om Prakash Vs. Punjab National Bank
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 70(1997)DLT633; 1997(41)DRJ470
Dalveer Bhandari, J.1. The petitioners have approached this Court against the transfer orders dated25.3.1997 issued by the respondent Bank by which the petitioners have been transferred outside Delhi. The main argument of the petitioners in this case is that the respondent Punjab National Bank has wrongly interpreted the 'Length of Service' asLength of Service in the Cadre, against the spirit and language of the guidelines dated16.9.1993. The petitioners have prayed that the illegal and erroneous transfer ordersbe quashed.2. The petitioners have relied upon the guidelines dated 16.9.1993. The relevant portion of the guidelines reads as under:'In the event the staff is identified as surplus for the Zone, the matter may be taken up with HO: Personnel Division for the redeployment of such staff ' in the same language area of nearby Zones.For out of station transfers but within the Region/Zone, the criteria should be the length of service of an employee, i.e., the employees with lesser len...
Tag this Judgment!S. Kadam Singh Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 70(1997)DLT315
M.S.A. Siddiqui, J.(1) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated24.10.1994 passed by the M.A.C.T. Delhi, whereby the amount of compensation ofRs. 50,000.00 as claimed by the appellant was awarded to him.(2) The appellant moved the M.A.C.T. Delhi seeking damages to the tune ofRs. 50,000.00 for the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. The Tribunal decreed the said claim but did not allow interest on the facts and circumstances of the case. Learned Counsel for the appellant has assailed the impugned award on the ground that the learned Tribunal has erroneously exercised his discretion in disallowing interest on amount of compensation.(3) Reliance has been placed on the decision of the Apex Court in RameshChandra v. Randhir Singh & Ors. : (1966)IILLJ152SC , in support of the saidcontention. Their Lordships have observed that: '....The question of award of interest is dependent on the claim beingallowed. Should the claim be not allowed, the question of grant of interest w...
Tag this Judgment!Saravanabava Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1998)(99)ELT317TriDel
1. This appeal arises from the Order-in-Original dated 31-3-1988, passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Coimbatore.2. By this order, the learned Collector has directed for confiscation under Section 111(d) and 111(m) of the Customs Act in respect of entire quantity of whole garments imported and declared through Bill of Entry No. 2, dated 9-8-1988. However, he has granted redemption on payment of fine of Rs. 700/- in lieu of confiscation. He has also held that improperly mutilated totally weighing 206.0 kgs. are confiscated under the said sections of the Act. Further he has granted redemption of payment of fine of Rs. 200/-. He has held that the fine specified are in addition to the duty leviable on such garments under Customs Tariff Heading No. 63.09. He has held that the remaining goods are correctly classifiable under Sub-heading 63.10 and not found eligible to confiscation and be realised without any action.3. He has passed a similar order in respect of Bill of Entry No. 3, d...
Tag this Judgment!E.C.P. Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1998)(102)ELT264TriDel
1. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Colour T.V. sets. They purchased colour picture tubes from the market and took the Modvat credit of duty paid on colour picture tubes under the Modvat scheme. In the month of March, the Central Excise Officers visited the factory premises of the appellants.On checking the Form IV register, they found that out of 328 colour picture tubes 273 colour picture tubes were lying rejected in the stores and were absolutely unfit for use on account of breakage/electrical fault/unremovable scratches or other unrepairable defects. The department alleged that since the Modvat credit is available only in respect of inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture final products and since the colour picture tubes found damaged could not be used in the manufacture of colour T.V. sets; therefore, no Modvat credit was admissible to the appellants. It was also alleged that the appellants had not received back cer...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Customs Vs. Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1997)(93)ELT799TriDel
1. When the case was called out today the Bench enquired whether notice had been served on Shri Vinod Kumar Didwania the second respondent or not. Learned Departmental Representative Shri G.D. Sharma showed to us Fax message dated 23-4-1997 addressed to his office by the Bombay Custom House to the effect that the notice for hearing on today were displayed on the Notice Board on the Custom House on 23-4-1997. It also stated that the Importer's address was that of the Madras and that there was no time to send a notice to Madras. As per the directions of this Bench made on 3-1-1997, the service of the notice was to be made on Shri Vinod Kumar Didwania through concerned Commissioner. Since the show cause notice indicated the address of Shri Vinod Kumar as at Madras, the Departmental Representative's office should have effective service through Commissioner of Cenral Excise, Madras and not through Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai.2. Shri Sharma states that since the cases against the...
Tag this Judgment!Desmet Chemfood Engg. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1998)(103)ELT114TriDel
1. This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 1414/90 of Collector of Customs (Appeals). The appellants imported Steel Rolls for cracking seeds. They claimed exemption under Notification 2/87, dated 1-1-1987. This was rejected on the ground that they were at the time of transportation not authorized under Solvent Extracted Oil, De-oiled Meal and Edible Flour (Control) Order, 1967 to extract refine oil.3. We have heard ld. DR and perused the records of the case. The appellants, from the Order-in-Appeal, appear to have approached Ministry of Food & Civil supplies for licence. That Ministry informed them that normally 'A' category licence is issued after the plant is completely installed and ready for commissioning. However, 'A' category licence would be issued to them on the completion of the plant.Notification categorically lays down, as condition for exemption, that the goods are imported by a person authorised under the Solvent Extracted Oil, De-oiled Meal and Edible Flo...
Tag this Judgment!