Delhi Court May 1999 Judgments

Century Laminating Co. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT522TriDel

1. The appellants were given a discount of 20% on the spare parts purchased by them at the time of purchasing the laminating machine. The impugned order has held the said discount not to be eligible for deduction while fixing the assessable value on the ground that the "discount offered is highly conditional in nature." The order goes on to state that even if the order is placed for machine along with the spares, but spares are, for any reason, supplied/delivered at a later date, discount is not available to the buyer and that it is a conditional discount offered to a specific individual who orders and purchases the machine and spares together. The order also relies on judgments of the Tribunal in Ruby Chemicals v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta(Tribunal), M/s. Oswal Woollen Mills v.Union of IndiaCoimbatore Pioneer Mills v.Collector of Customs 2. Arguing the appeal, learned Counsel, Mrs. Reena Khair submits that the discount in question is a normal commercial discount and the same sho...

Lohia Starlingers Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT648TriDel

1. Matter called. None for the appellant. However, vide their application dated 12-5-1999, they have requested for deciding the case on the basis of available facts and documents on record. Hence we have heard ld. JDR Sh. M.P. Singh in respect of Revenue's case.2. Question involved in the present matter is regarding classification of machine described as "Sacks Delivery and Stacking Unit (SDSU)." 3. The appellants claimed the Classification of the said item under Tariff Heading 84.48 as machine auxiliary to polycutting machine which according to them was classified under Tariff Heading 8444 as it was imported.4. As against the above, the lower authorities have held the classification of SDSU under Tariff Heading 84.79 as machine having an individual function.5. We have gone through the impugned order. Sum and substance of the findings of the authorities below is that SDSU cannot be considered a machine auxiliary to polycutting fabric whereas the function of SDSU is to deliver the sack...

Shri Ramesh Hanumantrao Bhalekar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. This O.A. is an off-shoot of the applicant's earlier O.A. No.1608/97, Shri Ramesh Hanumant Rao Bhalekar v. Union of India and 3 Ors., decided by us by a common order dated 9.12.1997 along with O.A.No. 2018/97, Shri Anindy as under, Son of Shri Brahmajyoti Goshal v.Union of India and 2 others with following directions: "9. In the result, these applications succeed and are hereby allowed. The selection of Shri B.C. Mandal, (3rd respondent in O.A. 2018/97 and 4th respondent in O.A. 1608/97), for the post of Chief Controller of Explosive is quashed and the contesting respondents are directed to proceed to fill up the vacancy on the basis of the 1982 Recruitment Rules, as amended upto 1985, as also to consider the names of the two applicants in these applications in the light of the method of recruitment and eligibility conditions mention in columns 10 and 11 of the schedule to the 1982 Rules." 2. The grievance of the applicant in the present O.A., more of less, appears to be the same a...

Chairman, Governing Body, College of Vocational Studies Vs. Zille Sing ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1999IVAD(Delhi)195; 79(1999)DLT762; 1999(50)DRJ137; ILR1999Delhi447

ORDERK. S. GUPTA, J.1. This appeal by the appellants is directed against the judgment dated 28th February, 1994 of a learned Single Judge of this court setting aside the order dated 11th December, 1984 of termination of services of the respondent and holding him entitled to full wages till 11th August, 1986, i.e. the date on which a new man was appointed, as compensation. 2. Facts giving rise to the appeal lie in a narrow compass. Zille Singh/respondent was appointed as Clerk-cum-Typist with the College of Vocational Studies on 10th October, 1979. He absented from duty from 8th eptember, 1984 to 11th September, 1984 and, thereforee, made an application for leave for that period on the ground that he could not attend duty because of urgent piece of work. Respondent was told that as the annual accounts for 1983-84 had to be finalised, it was necessary to utilise his services and he could not take any further leave. Despite that, respondent again absented from duty from 13th September, 19...

Vocke Curt Ulrich Vs. Customs Through Air Customs Officers

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1999IVAD(Delhi)313; 80(1999)DLT214; 1999(50)DRJ36; 1999(65)ECC881

ORDERS.N. Kapoor, J.1. Heard. According to the prosecution, the petitioner was arrested by the officers of Air Customs, IGI Airport, New Delhi while he was scheduled to board a Swiss Air flight dated 30th March 1999 Delhi to Zurich. The petitioner Mr. Vocke Curt Ulrich having a German Passport No. 7167142695 7167142695 was found carrying foreign currency. As he proceeded to the security hold area, he was intercepted by a Customs Officer in plain clothes and was asked whether he was carrying any currency or prohibited goods. The petitioner replied in negative. In presence of the witnesses notice was given to him in writing. His entire baggage was examined in the presence of two witnesses. As a result of examination of his hand bag, a brown colour leather purse was recovered inside it. On examination of that purse, foreign currency consisting of US$ 14,500, Deutsche Marks 3530, Swiss Francs 860 and Pounds 380 were recovered. He could not produce any currency declaration form or any docum...

Sant Ram and ors. Vs. Union Public Service Commission and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1999IVAD(Delhi)351; 80(1999)DLT664

Devinder Gupta, ACJ1. Appellants feeling aggrieved against the order passed on 23.11.1998 by learned Single Judge dismissing their write petition (C. W. 6051/98), have filed this appeal. 2. Facts in brief are that 33 posts of Assistant Engineers/Assistant Executive Engineers (Electrical) were advertised on 14.3.1998 by Union Public Service Commission (Respondent No. 1) to be filled in Delhi Vidyut Board by direct recruitment. Closing date of receipt of applications was 2.4.1998. In response to the advertisement, 1031 applications were received. On scrutiny, 815 applicants were considered eligible on the basis of their claim of possessing eligibility requirements mentioned in the advertisement, namely(a) degree in electrical engineering from a recognised university or equivalent ; and (b) two years professional experience preferably in large electric supply undertaking. 3. A decision was taken by respondent No.1 to conduct screening test on 5.12.1998 to be followed by interview, as a pr...

J. Georje and Others Vs. Union of India and Others

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1999IIIAD(Delhi)821; 1999(50)DRJ300

ORDERK. Ramamoorthy, J.1. In CWP. 524/97, the three petitioners, who are working as Laboratory Assistants in AES Sr.Secondary School, 1 DDU Marg, New Delhi-1, the third respondent have prayed for the following reliefs:- 'In the above noted facts and circumstances of the present case, it is, thereforee, most respectfully prayed that your lordships may graciously be pleased to:- (i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ order or direction quashing the order dated 26th October, 1995 and further to direct the respondent to sanction the petitioners (Laboratory Assistants) with effect from 01.01.1986 with all the consequential benefits. 2. In CWP. 558/97, the three petitioners, who are working as Laboratory Assistants in Mukharji Memorial Senior Secondary School, G.T.Road, Shahdara, Delhi - 32, have prayed for the following reliefs:- 'In the above noted facts and circumstances of the present case, it is, thereforee, most respectfully prayed that your lordships may graciously b...

Ram Dhari Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 79(1999)DLT723; II(1999)DMC194

S.N. Kapoor, J. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties on bail application. According to the statement of Mr. Suresh Kumar real brother of the deceased, marriage of Manju deceased was solemnized with Ramesh Kumar on 19.7.1991. After the marriage Manju lived in the joint family of her husband for three years but thereafter she started living separately from her in-laws in a flat Along with her husband. Her husband was running a Kirana shop under the house. Ramesh Kumar husband of deceased Manju died on 21.9.1997. The deceased had a child aged four and a half years. ' After the death of her husband Manju started living with her mother-in-law Roshni Devi, father-in-law Ram Dhari and Dever Naresh in M-17/B-4, Dilshad Garden. After the death of Ramesh Kumar, Manju's' Dever' Naresh, father-in-law Ramdhari, mother-in-law Roshni Devi and Kamlesh (Nand) started maltreating her. The deceased also told Suresh Kumar that they all wanted to get rid of her at any cost and she suspected that an...

Mrs. Uma Mitra Vs. Dy. Director (Education)

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 80(1999)DLT52; 1999(50)DRJ572

K. Ramamoorthy, J. 1. The petitioner is a Maths Teacher in the fourth respondent School. She became eligible to be promoted as PGT on the post of PGT (Maths) which fell vacant on the 1st of April, 1995. The DPC of the school made the selection and from the 10th of July, 1995, the petitioner has been working as PGT (Maths) in the School. Seeking the approval, the fourth respondent management, wrote to the Education Officer, Zone 26, New Delhi in the following terms:-'I am directed to inform you, as per instruction of the Chairman of the Managing Committee of the School that the order of vacancies as mentioned in our previous letter No. SPV/42/1995-90 dated 23.6.95 may be amended to record according to the date of creation of vacancies as mentioned below:- 1.The post of PGT(Hist) from the 5th Jan.' 95. 2. The post of PGT(Econ) from the .1st Feb.'95. 3. The post of PGT(Maths) from the 1st April'95. It may also be stated that according to your views for keeping reservation 40 point roster ...

Bar Council of Delhi and ors. Vs. K.K. Sud and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 80(1999)DLT1; 1999(50)DRJ645

Devinder Gupta, A.C.J.1. Shri Sanjay Jain and another filed writ petition on 20.7.1998 seeking direction for quashing resolution dated 19.7.1998 passed by Bar Council of Delhi by which Shri Sanjay Jain was ordered to be removed from the post of Secretary to the said Bar Council of Delhi directing that in his place Shri Surya Prakash Khatri is appointed as Secretary. Prayer was made to quash the proceedings of 17.7.1998 and to quash notice dated 18.7.1998 by which meeting had been called by Shri Surya Prakash Khatri. Thewrit petition was disposed of by the impugned judgment by learned Single Judge holding that appointment of Shri Sanjay Jain as Hony. Secretary was contrary to Rules and his claim to the said office cannot be sustained. The appointment of Shri Surya Prakash Khatri was also held 19 be not in consonance with the Rules and as such the appointment was quashed. Feeling aggrieved, this appeal was preferred by the Bar Council of Delhi and three others including Shri Surya Prakas...