Delhi Court August 1997 Judgments

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Mrs. Sangeeta Babbar

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

A.P Chowdhri, President: 1. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that Mrs. Sangeeta Taneja complainant for short, purchased Maruti Van with the financial participation of City Bank. The complainant had given blank cheques for repayment of the loan amount to the bank including some cheques for payment of premium to the Insurance Company. Accordingly comprehensive insurance was obtained in favour of the complainant from Oriental Insurance Company for the period 7.3.1991 to 6.3.1992. With regard to the renewal, the aforesaid Bank handed over a blank cheque on which date namely 28.2.1992 as well as the amount of premium were filled-up by the Insurance Company. The cheque was deposited in the Bank on 31.3.1992 even though the original policy expired on 6.3.1992 and complainant's cheque had been provided to the Insurance Company long before the expiry of the said period. The cheque was received back uncncashed on 20.4.1992 with the remarks that the effects were not clear and the cheque may...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Triveni Engg. Works Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(96)ELT655TriDel

1. The short point for determination before us in this appeal is whether boilers which are a part of the plant and machinery for manufacture of sugar is capital goods under Rule 57Q and is eligible to the benefit of credit of duty paid on boiler.2. Narrating the facts of the case Shri Y.R. Kilania, JDR submits that the respondents who are engaged in the manufacture of sugar, purchased boilers; that boiler was subsequently notified as an item of capital goods for purpose of Modvat credit only from 16-3-1995. The ld. JDR submits that since in the instant case on the date of taking credit boiler was not an item specially included for purpose of Modvat credit under Rule 57Q, therefore, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in holding that Modvat credit will be admissible on boiler.3. Countering the arguments of the ld. JDR, Shri R. Chibber the ld.Advocate submits that boiler is an integral part of the plant and machinery used for the manufacture of cement. He submits that boiler provid...

Triupati Tubes (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1997)(95)ELT431TriDel

1. This is an appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals), Allahabad dated 23-1-1996.2. Learned counsel stated that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Butyl Tubes classifiable under Central Excise Tariff sub-heading 4013. They have obtained central excise registration. They were availing Modvat facility and filing declaration under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 from time to time. In the process of manufacture of Butyl Tubes, the appellants cure the tubes with steam which is generated in a boiler installed in the factory. The boiler is fired by light diesel oil used as fuel.3. It was his submission that the Central Excise (First Amendment) Rules, 1944 vide Notification No. 4/94-C.E. (N.T.), dated 1-3-1994 inter alia inserted Clause (c) in the Explanation to Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 which reads as "(c) inputs used as fuel".Simultaneously, Notification No. 5/94-C.E. (N.T.), dated 1-3-1994 which superseded Notification No. 177/86-C.E., d...

Union of India Vs. Electronic Controls and Instrument Engineers

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)28; 1997(2)ARBLR691(Delhi); 68(1997)DLT739; 1997(43)DRJ100; (1998)119PLR33

Devinder Gupta, J.(1) The appeal has arisen against an order passed on 21.3.1996 by learned Single Judge of this Court allowing the respondent's application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and appointing Shri D.B.Chachad, Engineer, reseeding at A/1297,Safderjung Enclave, New Delhi as an arbitrator with direction to him to enter upon reference, to hold arbitration proceedings at Patiala and make his award in accordance with law. (2) One of the grounds, which was raised by the appellant before the learned Single Judge and has also been raised in this appeal is the jurisdiction of the Court at Delhi to entertain and decide the application under Section 20 of the Act. (3) The undisputed facts are that the appellants invited open tenders for the work described as 'Provision of street lightening in the D.C.W.Colony Patiala'. The aforementioned tenders were invited by Deputy Chief Electrical Engineer, D.C.W. Patiala. The tenders were submit...

Talvinder Singh and ors. Vs. State (Delhi Admn.)

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1998(44)DRJ175; (1998)118PLR49

Anil Dev Singh, J.1. This is an appeal against the order dated June 6, 1994 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby the appellants were convicted under section 20 of the N.D.P.S. Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- each, and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. The facts leading to the appeal are as under :2. On 25th September, 1989 a secret information was received by Inspector Ram Kishan that a truck bearing No. DIG 9362 was carrying contraband. Pursuant to the information, on the night intervening 25th and 26th September 1989 a raiding party was organized and the truck bearing No.DIG 9362 was intercepted at G.T. Road Shahdara Check Post. At that time appellants No.1 to 4 and Narender Singh Narang were found to be in the truck. According to the prosecution, appellant No.1 was the driver of the truck, appellant No.3 was a helper, appel...

State Vs. Ajay Kumar Singh and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1998IAD(Delhi)639; 69(1997)DLT797

Arun Kumar, J. (1) This murder reference and the connected appeals arise from the judgment dated 28th May, 1996 passed by a learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi. In all five accused had been tried for offences under Sections 302/307/120B, IPC. Accused Ajay Kumar Singh was also charged for an offence under Sections 27/54 of the Arms Act, 1959. Accused Rajender Kumar died during the course of the trial. All the remaining four accused were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment and fines and in default of payment of fine further imprisonment etc. Accused Ajay Kumar Singh was also awarded death sentence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code . for committing the murder of Mukesh Kumar. For the offences under Sections 120B and 307/34, Indian Penal Code . he was awarded sentences for life imprisonment besides fines. He was also awarded the sentence of imprisonment for seven years and fine for conviction under the Arms Act. Accused Sudhir Jain was sentenced to imprisonment for life under S...

Mohd. Suleman Vs. Delhi Development Authority

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1997VAD(Delhi)588; 68(1997)DLT351; 1997(42)DRJ655

Devinder Gupta, J.(1) Petitioner on 14.1.1991 filed Writ Petition No. 165/91 seeking allotment and delivery of plot/shop situated in Fruit and Vegetable Market, Okhla by way of an alternate allotment in lieu of an area near Jama Masjid, from where he had been operating from which place he was evicted in the year 1976 under the Scheme of Clearance of Shopkeepers carrying on business in the Jama Masjit Area, Delhi. The said writ petition was disposed of on settlement arrived at amongst parties in the following terms : 'COUNSEL for the parties are agreed that the claim of the petitioner will be satisfied with the allotment of a vegetable stall in favor of the petitioner in Block-A at Anand Vihar, Delhi. Ordered accordingly. THE petition and the applications are disposed of in the aforesaid terms.' WHEN no allotment was made in petitioner's favor despite the above agreement and despite the petitioner having approached the respondents through representations, the petitioner sought further d...

Macdowell and Co. Ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)191; 68(1997)DLT767; 1997(43)DRJ42

Devinder Gupta, J. (1) Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 to transfer/mutate the portion of the property, namely, west half wing comprising of the basement, ground floor, the entire first floor and western half of the barsati floor with land under-heath at F.44-A, New Delhi South Extension Part-I, New Delhi in favor of the petitioner with further direction to quash the warrant of distress and attachment orders (annexure-VI and VII) dated 7.10.1988 and 13.10.1988 respectively and to restrain the respondents from collecting arrears of Municipal Property Tax amounting to Rs.1,82,918.00 or any other arrears of Municipal Tax as reflected in the bill (annexure-V) pertaining to the predecessors in interest of the petitioner or the other co-owners of the property in occupation of the other half is sought in this petition instituted on 19.10.1988. (2) It is the petitioner's case that through an agreement of sale dated 23.6.1983 entered into between the petitioner and respondent No.5,...

Gaurav Enterprises Vs. Delhi Development Authority

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)204; 68(1997)DLT756; 1997(43)DRJ13

Devinder Gupta, J.(1) The petitioner is seeking direction against the respondent to withdraw letter (annexure-P) dated 13.10.1995 with further direction to allot to it C.S.C. Plot No.6, Sector 15, Rohini, New Delhi at the auction rate i.e. taking the bid amount divided by the area of the plot announced at the time of auction. (2) The admitted facts are that in July, 1994, the respondent announced the auction of Convenient Shopping Centre Site No.6, Sector 15, Rohini, New Delhi measuring 1285.51 sq.mts., which was to take place on 26.8.194 at 11.30 a.m. at D.D.A.Auction Hall, Vikas Sadan, I.N.A. Market, New Delhi. The user prescribed was shop-cum- office. The auction took place on the specified date as per the terms and conditions of auction annexure-B. The petitioner was declared the highest bidder at a premium of Rs.24,35,000.00 . Clause 2(vii) of the terms and conditions of auction inter alias provide that the size of the plot announced by the respondent was only approximate; and the...

Deepak Kumar Singh Vs. Union of India

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1997VIAD(Delhi)185; 68(1997)DLT788; 1997(43)DRJ4

Devinder Gupta, J. (1) The petitioner has sought the quashing of order of discharge dated 3.12.1993 with direction to the respondents to reinstate him with full back wages and all consequential benefits. In the alternative, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to award disability medical pension to him (2) The petitioner was enrolled in the Indian Air Force on 22.3.1991 as Airman in the Trade - 'Photo Technician'. According to the petitioner, a board of Medical Officers, which conducted medical examination before his entry to the Air Force declared him fit in all respects and made no note of any disease or disability in the documents of his enrolment. In November, 1992, the petitioner completed initial training and was qualified as Aircraftsman and was posted in No.2 Sqn.Air Force. In May, 1993 he was sent on posting to E & I.T.I., Jalahalli East, Bangalore for conversion course from Photo Technician to Photo Filter Trade. It is further...