Delhi Court March 1999 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1999 Page 8 of about 205 results (0.019 seconds)Ramjilal Mina Vs. the Municipal Corpporation of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1999IIAD(Delhi)830; 79(1999)DLT151
ORDERK. Ramamoorthy, J.1. The petitioner was working as Vaidya in the Government Ayurvedic Department, Rajasthan. Pursuant to the advertisement made by the MCD for the post of Vaidya, the petitioner applied for the post of Vaidya, and he was appointed as Vaidya on the 14th of December, 1984. It is common ground that he completed his probation successfully. The next promotion post for the category of Vaidya in MCD is Resident Superintendent (ISM). Under the recruitment regulations, framed in 1987, for the said post, the mode of promotion is by selection and the qualification prescribed for a person to be considered for promotion for the post of the Resident Superintendent (ISM) is 8 years' regular service in the grade of Vaidya. thereforee, a person holding the post of Vaidya could be considered for promotion for the post of Resident Superintendent (ISM) and he must have put in eight years' regular service in the grade as Vaidya.2. The case of the petitioner is that adding the service r...
Tag this Judgment!Pritam Singh and ors. Vs. State of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 78(1999)DLT749; 1(1999)DMC666
S.N. Kapoor, J.1. By this petition u/Sec. 482, Cr.PC the petitioner seeks quashing of the proceedings arising out of FIR No. 332/93 Under Sections 498-A/406/34, IPC at PS Jahangir Puri, Delhi. 2. The relevant facts giving rise to the petition are as under: Praveen Kaur filed a complaint on 14.11.1993 at P.S. Jahangir Puri. She alleged in the complaint that she was married on 7th May, 1989 to late Shri Bhupinder Singh at Chattiwind, Amritsar. Dowry was given according to status of her parents. But her in-laws were not satisfied and they demanded cash, jewellery and colour TV. These demands could not be met. Thereupon, her father-in-law Pritam Singh and brothers-in-law Ravinder Singh and Karamjeet Singh started abusing, beating and torturing her. She and her husband used to tolerate it helplessly. On 7th May, 1990, a child Paramveer Singh @ Honey was born. Thereafter her father-in-law and brothers-in-law started demanding more dowry and used to harass her. On 15th October, 1990, her husb...
Tag this Judgment!Beekay Engg. Corporation Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1999)LC545Tri(Delhi)
1. The question involved before us is regarding classification of Cooling Plates/Plate Coolers. The manner in which the said cooling plates/cooler plates are used has been succinctly described by one of the lower authorities in one of the impugned orders namely 270-CE/IND/92, dated 28-4-1992 para 6 in File No. E/4012/92-D is reproduced below :- "6. The arguments advanced by the appellant leave me totally unimpressed. The cooling plate/cooler plate is an item through which water circulates for cooling plate/plate coolers are laid one above the other in between the shell of the furnace and refractory to keep the refractory cooled they are capable of being removed and replaced as and when required so they are essentially the parts of the furnace. Without these parts/devices the blast furnace will not function properly. From 1-3-1988 there was no generic heading of castings and the metal chapters were fully aligned with HSN. It was observed that Heading 73.25 HSN has a restricted scope co...
Tag this Judgment!Karnataka Electricity Board Vs. Collr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1999)LC276Tri(Delhi)
1. In this Bunch of 3 appeals ld. Advocate Shri C.R. Sridhar does not press for appeal No. E/3167/92 which relates to fabrication of iron and steel rocks from iron and steel angles. He prays for withdrawal of the said appeal.2. In view of the aforesaid prayer Appeal No. E/3167/92 is dismissed as withdrawn.3. Relating to other two appeals ld. Advocate submits that Appeal No.E/3168 deals with the following 7 items.Out of aforesaid 7 items, submits the ld. advocate 5 items fell for consideration before the South Zone Bench vide its Order No. 1814/98, dated 10-9-98 it held that manufacturing of the 5 products, namely :- cannot be called manufacture in the eyes of Central Excise law, inasmuch as no new commodity having a different name, character or use has come into existence. Names given herein are only for the purpose of identification by the appellants themselves. These are not commercial names. Only various iron and steel duty paid products are cut to sizes, punching, drilling holes a...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmi Steel Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT521TriDel
1. By Final Order No. A/837/97-NB, dated 1-7-1997, the Tribunal held that deemed credit was admissible to the appellants herein and allowed their appeal with consequential relief in accordance with law. The learned Consultant Shri Sahai submits that after the receipt of the final order of the Tribunal, they applied to the Assistant Commissioner in October, 1997 for permission to take credit of Rs. 5,72,657.68 P in their PLA which was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner vide his letter dated 29-7-1998. The appellants seek implementation of the Tribunal's order by directing the Department to allow the appellants to take credit in PLA of the above mentioned amount.2. The learned DR Shri Sanjiv Srivastava submits that the Assistant Commissioner has communicated that due to withdrawal of Modvat facility on hot re-rollable products under Notification No. 33/97, dated 1-8-1997, the request for allowing amount in PLA cannot be acceded to, and the proper course would be to take credit of th...
Tag this Judgment!Doaba Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1999)(107)ELT768TriDel
1. The appellants herein are engaged in the manufacture of MS ingots.Three furnaces are installed in their factory. For the period 8-9-1997 to 4-3-1998, furnace of 2.5 MTs capacity was closed and the appellants sought abatement of duty in terms of proviso to Section 3A(3) of the Central Excise Act. The Adjudicating authority has rejected the claim for abatement on the ground that abatement can be allowed only if the factory as a whole remains closed for a period of seven days or more and since the other two furnaces were working and there was production in the factory, abatement was not permissible. Hence this appeal.2. We have heard Shri Pradeep Jain, learned Counsel who contends that since the determination of annual production capacity is furnacewise and abatement should also be allowed furnacewise and duty cannot be demanded when there is no production as far as one furnace is concerned and Shri Satnam Singh learned DR who in addition to reiterating the findings in the impugned or...
Tag this Judgment!Modella Steels and Alloys Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1999)(107)ELT614TriDel
2. The appellants herein purchased M.S. Rolls and they are grooving within the factory and converted into grooved rolls for the purpose of Rolling Mills. Questions arisen are whether 1. the grooving undertaken by the appellants is the process of manufacture or not. 2. if it is considered to be a manufacture whether the benefit of Notification 281/86-C.E. would be available to the appellants or not. Ld. Advocate Shri R. Swaminathan submits that he does not press the first question.He submits that even if it is assumed that the manufacture of grooved rollers has been done by the appellant it is for the purpose of maintenance of the rolling mills in the factory. He is, therefore, entitled to the benefit of Notification 281/86-C.E. In respect of his proposition ld. Advocate relies on two judgments of the Tribunal namelyParashuram Iran & Steel Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. v. C.C.E., Pune reported in 1997 (89) E.L.T. 535 (Tribunal). Ld. Advocate, therefore, submits that there is no question o...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Jyoti Ceramic Industries P. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (1999)LC547Tri(Delhi)
1. Question involved in this appeal is regarding classification of ceramic seal faces/rings, ceramic thread guides. The appellant claims that the classification of the said two items should be under Chapter 84 whereas the Revenue contends that the same are sustainable under Tariff Heading 69.11 as "other articles of ceramic". Appellant has relied upon Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Sealol Hindustan Ltd. v. Union of India reported in 1988 (36) E.L.T. 283 (Bom.). It has been held in Customs case in that judgment that ceramic rings are classifiable under Chapter 84 as part of the machine. Union's contention to the effect that these are to be treated as ceramic article did not find favour with the said High Court judgment.2. We have gone through the aforesaid judgment of the High Court. We have also gone through the impugned order and have heard the ld. JDR.In support of the Revenue's contention, we observe that Chapter Note 1(b) of Chapter 84 specifically excludes "appliance o...
Tag this Judgment!Aarkey Engg. Co. Vs. D.D.A.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1999IVAD(Delhi)187; 80(1999)DLT514
ORDERSUIT No. 1137-A/93, is 8463/93(u/s. 30-33) 1. In response to the tender invited by the respondent-DDA, the work for construction of certain LIG houses at Hastal was awarded to the petitioner vide agreement No. 8/EE/WD-9/DDA-88-89. The stipulated date of commencement of work was 9.7.88 and the same was to be completed on 8.10.1989. On 7.1.1989, the respondent-DDA rescinded the contract. Consequent upon some disputes having arisen between the parties, the matter was referred to the arbitration in terms of the arbitration agreement. The Arbitrator published his award of 28.8.1992. 2. While the petitioner filed an application for making the award a rule of the Court, the respondent DDA has filed objections under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act against the award. The respondent is mainly aggrieved by the rejection of counter-claim No. 2 and award on claim No. 3 preferred by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent contended that in view of clause (2) of the agreemen...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Usman Farroq Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1999IIIAD(Delhi)403; 1999CriLJ2313; 1999(50)DRJ692; ILR1999Delhi192
ORDERK.S. Gupta, J.1. This petition challenges the detention order dated 27th May, 1998 passed against the petitioner under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short the 'Act') by respondent No. 2.2. In the incident dated 24th March, 1998, 29,300 French Francs, 69,900 Saudi Riyals, 3000 Qatar Riyals and 3,650 UAE Dirhans were allegedly recovered concealed in button studs from the handbag of the petitioner at IGI Airport, New Delhi. Since the petitioner was unable to produce any evidence to support lawful acquisition of the said currency, the same was seized by the customs department vide panchnama dated 24th March, 1998. Voluntary statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 is stated to have been made by the petitioner wherein he admitted the concealment and recovery of the said foreign currency from him. The petitioner was arrested on 25th March, 1998 and the order of detention under challenge was made on ...
Tag this Judgment!