Delhi Court February 1999 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.
Shubh Coatings (P) Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1999
Reported in: (1999)(83)LC620Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals), New Delhi dated 29.9.1995.2. Learned Consultant appearing for the appellant(s) stated that they manufacture coated fabrics (sub-heading 5903.19 and the main input is Poly-vinyl chloride (sub-heading 3904.10). Input weighing 9.00 MT manufactured by IPCL, Vadodara was consigned to their Delhi Depot under GPI No. 3509 dated 1.12.1993. The Delhi Office IPCL cleared the entire consignment to their consignee stockist-cum-distributor-Kapoor Sales Corpn. who sold the goods to Shri Balajee Plastics, Delhi under Invoice dated 6.12.1993 and the appellants purchased the consignment in full in factory packed condition on 29.12.1993 under a regular bill.3. He also submitted that Modvat credit for Rs. 90,300/- was taken on 29.12.1993. The Range staff found nothing amiss or irregular with the two endorsements on the reverse of the GP I. The RT 12 was assessed and passed before close of January, 1994.4. The Assistant Collector, however,...
Narinder Kumar Soni Vs. Sun Shine Roadways and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1999
Reported in: 1999IIAD(Delhi)329; AIR1999Delhi189; ILR1999Delhi178; 1999RLR201
ORDERS.K. Mahajan, J.1. Plaintiff filed this suit for possession and recovery of mesne profit and damages on the allegations that commencing from 1st April, 1994 the premises comprising of shop No. 3 left wing, ground floor of property No. 10/60B, Kirti Nagar Industrial Area, New Delhi, measuring 750 sq.ft., was let to the defendant on a rent of Rs. 4,080/ p.m. The premises was let for a period of two years w.e.f. 1st April, 1994 and on the expiry of the lease when the tenant did not vacate the same, the plaintiff served three notices dated 6th April, 1996; 16th April, 1996 and 25th September, 1996 terminating the tenancy of the premises, though, according to the plaintiff, on the expiry of the lease on 31st March, 1996 no notice was required to be served for termination of lease. After the termination of lease, the plaintiff filed this suit for possession as well as for damages/manse profits from 1st April, 1996 to 31st December, 1996 at the rate of Rs. 12,000/ per month. In the plain...
Pramod Kumar Khare Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1999
Reported in: 1999IIAD(Delhi)666; 1999(49)DRJ456
ORDERK. Ramamoorthy, J. 1. It is not necessary to narrate the facts in each of the cases in details as the point involved is a common one and it is also a very short one. The three petitioners were working in the second respondent Organisation. On 19.01.1985 the charge sheet was issued to them and it is stated that the petitioner had claimed reimbursement of Leave Travel Concession (in short LTC) expenditure producing false/fake documents. The petitioner submitted their Explanationn almost admitting the guilt and enquiry was conducted. The inquiry officer gave his report on 29.05.1985. When the enquiry was pending the second respondent issued circular in respect of employees who had claimed reimbursement on false/fake documents. The Circular reads as under: MOTHER DAIRY DELHI 110 092 A/OC/2/14 25/26th June, 1985 C I R C U L A R It has been brought to our notice that some employees of the Dairy have claimed reimbursement of LTC expenditure without performing such journey by producing fa...
Shrijee Synthetics (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/S.Manju Falls and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1999
Reported in: 78(1999)DLT123
ORDERS.N. Kapoor, J.1. This order shall dispose of an is No.11157/95 in S.No.2527/95. One Sh.Kailash Kasera, Selling Agent of the plaintiff company, has filed this suit for permanent injunction on behalf of the above named company restraining the defendants and their agents etc. (i) from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale or otherwise directly or indirectly dealing in 'textile piece goods/blouse pieces' under the infringing trade name MANJU or MANJU FALLS or any other mark which may be identical or deceptively similar to the registered trade mark MANJU of the plaintiff'; (ii) for restraining the defendants and their agents etc. from passing off their goods as the goods of the plaintiff. The plaintiff further seeks a decree of Rs.5,00,000/ by way of damages and destruction of all the blocks, dies, packing boxes, packing cartons/wrappers, packing boxes, packing material/cartons and stationery etc. used for infringing the aforesaid trade mark. In this very connection, the above I.A...
Ram Millan Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1999
Reported in: 1999IIIAD(Delhi)85; 79(1999)DLT226; 1999(49)DRJ199
ORDERJ.B.Goel, J.1. This is a petition for bail under Section 439 read with Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code'). 2. In this application the petitioner while seeking the bail is also challenging the legality and validity of order dated 7th October, 1998 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge rejecting his application for bail sought because of the right accrued under proviso to subSection (2) of Section 167 of the Code. 3. Briefly, the facts which are not disputed during arguments, are that on the basis of alleged recovery of 300 Gms. of Ganja the petitioner was arrested by the police on 30th July, 1998 and was remanded to judicial custody on 31st July, 1998 and the remand was extended from time to time. Challan, having not been filed, on 28th September, 1998 an application for bail was filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code read with proviso to subSection (2) of Section 167 of the Code. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge on 28th...
Mahipal Singh Vs. Delhi Development Authority and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1999
Reported in: 1999IIAD(Delhi)688; 78(1999)DLT722
K. Ramamoorthy, J. 1. The writ petitioner has filed this petition seeking to quash the charge-sheet dated 1.10.1991 on the basis of delay. According to the petitioner, there has been no justification in issuing charge-sheet. The point raised in the writ petition is covered by the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in CW No. 3145/94 and CW 5887/94 dated 1.5.1995 and following the judgment of the Supreme Court. This has also been followed by this Court in D.P. Bambam v. Union of India and Ors. : 74(1998)DLT437 . 2. In view of the settled position, the writ petition stands allowed. 3. The charge-sheet dated 1.10.1991 is quashed. The petitioner is entitled to be considered for promotion and other consequential benefits. There shall be no order as to costs. ...
Porritts and Spencer (Asia) Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1999
Reported in: (1999)(84)LC688Tri(Delhi)
1. The short point arises for our consideration in this appeal is whether interest on a notional basis on the advance deposit received by the appellant from various buyers would form part of assessable value or not? 2. When the matter was called, Shri A.K. Suri, Manager (Commercial) of the appellants concern appeared and requested for an adjournment. On going through the issue involved in this case, we find that the matter can be proceeded with. Accordingly, we proceed to pass this order after hearing Shri K. Shiv Kumar, learned JDR.3. It was brought to our notice the issue involved in this case has been covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of VST Industries Ltd. v. CCE. Hyderabad reported in 1998 (97) ELT 395 Para 12 : 1998 (74) ECR 486 (SC) para 11 of the said decision is relevant and same is reproduced as under: Coming to the facts of the present case it is not in dispute that the appellants are charging a uniform price from their wholesale dealers. The price at...
Collector of Central Excise Vs. Pack Art Printers
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1999
Reported in: (1999)LC437Tri(Delhi)
1. This is an appeal filed with reference to the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay. A notice was duly issued to the respondents but it has been returned undelivered.3. Learned DR stated that the issue involved in this matter relates to the classification of Printed Wrappers of different size and colours meant for wrapping soap cakes.4. The Asstt. Collector had classified them under Heading 4823.90. The Department thereupon filed an appeal before the Collector (Appeals), but the Collector (Appeals) rejected the Department's appeal on the ground that no reason for seeking classification under 4823.19 had been given by the Department.5. It was their submission that as a matter of fact the Board had issued a Circular F. No. 61/14/89-CX. 4, dated 6-11-1989 in which all the officers were informed that the matter had been examined and it was clarified that the product wrapping paper cut to size for packing individual cakes of soap would be classifiable under Chapter 4823.19 (and ...
Union of India Vs. Santosh JaIn and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1999
Reported in: 1999IIAD(Delhi)409; 78(1999)DLT634; 1999(49)DRJ123
ORDERArun Kumar, J.1. By this application under Order 47, Rule 1 Code of Civil Procedure the applicants have sought review of this court's order dated 24th August, 1998. In order to dispose of this application, it is necessary to give briefly the background of the controversy. 2. The Railways employed certain typists on ad hoc basis in the years 197980 from the open market on ad hoc basis by way of stopgap arrangement till regularly selected hands could be available from the Railway Service Commission, Allahabad. The recruitment of typists is regulated by para 75 of the Indian Railways Establishment Manual VolumeI. The said provision does not envisage typists being employed from the open market. The administration had to resort to open market employment because of the nonavailability of typists of the Railways Service Commission. The petitioners in the review application are typists who were regularly appointed by way of selection through the Railway Service Commission and were employe...
Satish Mehra Vs. Bank of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1999
Reported in: 78(1999)DLT275; (1999)ILLJ1161Del
K. Ramamoorthy, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order of removal passed by the Disciplinary Authority which was confirmed by the Appellate Authority. From the records it appears that the father of the petitioner was the President of the Cricket Association in New Delhi. There was some investigation against the petitioner about opening of accounts in the names of fictitious persons in the second half of 1981. On 12.10.1981 petitioner submitted his resignation. On 10.12.1981 the Bank did not accept his resignation. On 4.1.1982 he was kept under suspension. On 31.3.1982 the Zonal Manager of the Bank wrote to the petitioner that the decision not to accept the resignation of the petitioner had been reconsidered and the resignation of the petitioner had been accepted and the petitioner stood relieved from the services of the Bank with immediate effect.2. The petitioner did not accept this and he maintained that he continued to be the employee of the Bank. On 4.9.1982 the Zonal Manager...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »