Delhi Court November 1998 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.
World Tel Inc. and anr. Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-1998
Reported in: 1999IIAD(Delhi)28; 77(1999)DLT127
C.K. Mahajan, J.1. The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus against the respondents to reimburse them to the extent of Rs. 83,08,894.02 paid by them towards Customs duty with interest calculated @ 21 % per annum from 22nd March, 1996, that is, the date of payment by the petitioner, till the date of its realisation.2. The respondent No. 2, Doordarshan is the sole Government agency for production and telecasting of television programmes in India.3. According to the petitioner, the petitioner and Doordarshan, respondent No. 2, jointly agreed for the direct telecast of the Challengers Cup Cricket Tournament which was being held in Calcutta in March, 1995. It was a four days tournament to be held from 18th March to 21st March, 1995. The telecast of the Tournament was to be a Doordarshan production by the Doordarshan staff with technical assistance provided by the petitioners. Doordarshan undertook to provide entire crew personnel for the coverage of the Tournament at no charge. The petitione...
Urmila and Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Indian Farmers Fertilizers Co-operati ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-1998
Reported in: 1999VAD(Delhi)524; 76(1998)DLT849; 1999(50)DRJ579
ORDERDalveer Bhandari, J.1. The plaintiffs have filed an application under Sec. 20 of the Arbitration Act for referring the disputes between the parties to the arbitration. In pursuance to the notice, a detailed reply has been filed on behalf of the defendants. In the plaint, it is alleged that the plaintiffs and the defendants entered into a agreement on 10th June, 1986 for transportation of cargo by road and river route from the Indian Port of Landing to the plant site at Anole upon the terms and conditions agreed therein and for a total price of Rs. 15,57 crores to be paid by the defendants to the plain-tiffs.2. It is further mentioned that the plaintiffs in or about 1987 completed the transportation work and the plant was commissioned by the defendants in or about 1988 within the stipulated period. The plaintiffs sent their final bill on or about 21st MArch, 1989 showing the balance amount of Rs. 1.57 crores payable by the defendants to the plaintiffs. It is further alleged that th...
investigators Association, Dda Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-1998
Reported in: 1998VIIAD(Delhi)527; 76(1998)DLT801; 1998(47)DRJ709
ORDERVijender Jain, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the Investigators Association in its representative capacity seeking to challenge denial of application of the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'.2. It has been contended before me by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr.S K Kaul, that the members of the petitioners has been discriminated in their scales of pay with Investigators called by different designations in various Department of the Central Government as well as Field Investigators serving with the respondent. It was contended that the petitioners were being paid in the initial pay scales of Rs.330-560 whereas Field Investigators with the respondent-Delhi Development Authority (for short 'DDA'), who were performing the same duties as that of the petitioners were in the pay scale of Rs.425-700/800. It was contended that for the purpose of preparing the Second Master Plan, advertisements were issued by the respondents from time to time for filling...
Randhir Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-1998
Reported in: 1998VIIAD(Delhi)604
ORDERJ.B. Goel, J.1. Petitioner was convicted by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (M.M.) for offences under Sections 279 and 304-A IPC and was sentenced to RI of two years and a fine of Rs. 2,000/- under Section 304-A IPC and SI of six months and a fine of Rs. 500/- under Section 279 IPC with default clause vide judgment and order dated 25.3.1998 and 27.4.1998. His conviction and sentence have been upheld by the appellate court of learned Addl. Session Judge. 2. By this revision petition under Section 397 Cr.P.C. the petitioner challenges the legality and propriety of his conviction and sentence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the finding of conviction is based on misreading of evidence, the conclusions drawn are not reasonable and proper. The finding about the identity of the petitioner as the driver of the offending vehicle is unreasonable and not justified; the circumstance not put to the accused has been taken into consideration and also that on the materi...
Kamal Seth Vs. Mrs. Saroj Seth
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-1998
Reported in: 76(1998)DLT966; I(1999)DMC267
Mukul Mudgal, J. 1. None appears for any of the parties. Since the revision petition is of the year 1989, it is being taken up today and finally disposed of. The respondent-wife moved an application under Sections 24 and 26 of Hindu Marriage Act for maintenance pendente lite. After going into various accounts submitted before the Trial Court, the learned Additional District judge has come to the finding by its impugned order dated 14.12.88 that award of sums of Rs. 1,000/- per month towards the maintenance of the applicant wife, and Rs.500/- towards the educational expenses and maintenance of the child Miss Heena Seth are justified. The Trial Court has given a detailed order considering the income tax returns and the fact that the petitioner was in business and had some rental income and the petitioner-wife was living in one room of her matrimonial home. The main plea of the petitioner in the revision petition is that the impugned order could not have been passed against him after the ...
The Ganganagar Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. Delhi Cloth Mills and General Comp ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-1998
Reported in: 1999(50)DRJ530
Dalveer Bhandari, J.1. The plaintiff filed a suit for the recovery of Rs.24,09,839.42 against the defendants, and prayed that a decree of the said amount be passed in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants. The plaintiff further prayed that the defendants be directed to pay interest on the decretal amount from the date of the institution of the suit till realization along with the costs.2. According to the allegations in the plaint, the plaintiff company during the period between March, 1973 and April, 1976 imported rectified spirit from various States, including the State of Uttar Pradesh for the manufacture of country liquor at its various distilleries and warehouses situated in the State of Rajasthan.3. In order to import the rectified spirit required by the plaintiff for its distilleries and warehouses it had to comply with the relevant provisions of the Excise Act prevalent in the State of Rajasthan relating to import and also of those prevalent in the State of Uttar Pr...
Manglam Cement Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: (1999)(63)ECC220
1.2 The appellants are engaged in manufacture of cement. The appellants intended to clear cement from their factory after 17.00 hours on the day of presentation of the Finance Bill/Budget 1993 i.e. 27-2-1993.Consequently, in compliance with the provisions of Rule 224(2A) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the appellants executed an undertaking to pay the differential duty if the duty on cement was enhanced in the Budget. They cleared the cement weighing 404.5 mts. at the rate of Rs. 290/- per tonne as basic excise duty and Rs. 43.50 per mt. (@15% of BED) as special excise duty. However, the basic excise duty on cement was enhanced to Rs. 330/- per mt. but the special excise duty was withdrawn according to the budget proposals effective from 28-2-1993.1.3 In terms of the undertaking, the appellants were asked to deposit the differential duty @ Rs. 40/- per mt. (Rs. 300-Rs. 290) plus 15% of B.E.D. as S.E.D. on the aforesaid quantity of cement cleared on the budget day after 17.00 hrs. t...
Commissioner of Cus. Vs. Timetech Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: (1998)(105)ELT340TriDel
1. The matter is listed for admission of appeal filed by revenue. The issue involved is whether penalty is imposable on respondents M/s.Timetech Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. as they had imported goods without specific import licence.2. Shri T.A. Arunachalam, learned JDR, submitted that the respondents had imported one Oakwood Laminator which was classified by them under Heading 84.65 of the Customs Tariff Act. On examination of the goods, it was found to be classifiable under sub-heading 8479.89 of the Customs Tariff Act. The Additional Collector, Customs confiscated the impugned goods with an option to redeem the same on payment of fine of Rs. 80,000/- and imposed a penalty of Rs. 20,000/- under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act holding that the impugned goods being a consumer item required specific import licence in accordance with the provisions of the H.S. Aligned Import & Export Policy and since no import licence had been produced, the goods were liable to confiscation. Learned DR e...
Khanna Brothers Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: (1999)(105)ELT649TriDel
1. These are five appeals posted for admission today. After hearing both the sides for some time, I am of the view that the issue involved is very short which can be disposed of finally. I, therefore, admit all the five appeals.2. In all these appeals, condonation of delay applications has also been filed. Shri H.B. Sharma, learned Advocate pointed out that all the five appeals were filed in time which is evident from the fact that the Registry wrote to them for removal of the defects in the appeal papers.Shri Srivastava, learned DR leaves the matter to the discretion of the Bench. Taking into consideration the fact that the matter was listed before the Registry and it is evident from the record that the appeal papers were received on 28-9-1997 which is within the time limit, as such there is no delay in filing of these appeals.3. The learned Counsel submitted that all the five refund claims were filed by them in time as specified in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act before the Ra...
Kirpal Singh Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-10-1998
Reported in: (1999)(105)ELT599TriDel
1. Heard both sides. 52 biscuits of gold were recovered from Mr. Kirpal Singh. With Kirpal Singh all the three -applicants herein were travelling in a car along with two occupants. These people were detected at first instance by Police. Later on, the gold was handed over to the Customs authorities and they were remanded to the judicial custody of the Customs authorities by the Magistrate concerned.Statements were recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act. In the defence statement, all the three of them have made confession, implicating themselves and admitting that the gold recovered from them was smuggled gold. Based on these statements and the evidence of the Police Officer, the adjudicating authority has found that the gold is liable to be confiscated and accordingly they have confiscated the said gold. He also imposed penalty of Rs. Five lakhs on Kirpal Singh, Rs. Five lakhs on Kamal Singh and Rs. 2 lakhs on Shri Sain Singh.2. Ld. advocate Shri H.S. Bhullar has submitted that ...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »