Delhi Court September 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.
Commissioner of Customs Vs. A.N. Sons
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1999
Reported in: (2000)(115)ELT758TriDel
1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the matter relates to the interpretation of the conditions under Col. 5 of the Table at Sl. No.32 of the Notification No. 53/88-C.E., dated 1-3-1988. The respondents are M/s. A.N. Sons. The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) had taken a view that no counterveiling duty under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 was leviable on the Acrylic Plastic Sheets when they had been manufactured in the foreign country out of scrap of plastics and that there was no condition about due payment with regard to the scrap of plastics mentioned in the conditions subject to which nil rate of duty was applicable to Acrylic Plastic Sheets.2. When the matter was called, none appeared for the respondents.Earlier, the matter was fixed for hearing on 9-7-1999 and on the request of the respondents, the matter was fixed for today. Copies of the appeal papers had earlier been sent to the respondents on 25-4-1996 and the copies were again sent to them under communicatio...
Fordham Pressing (India) P. Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1999
Reported in: (2000)(115)ELT699TriDel
1. The appellants vide letter dated 1st September, 1999 have requested to decide their appeal on merits.2. The appellants filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal dated 4-5-1992 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). In the impugned order the Collector (Appeals) held that moulding dyes manufactured by the appellants are classifiable under Heading 84.80 of the Central Excise Tariff.2. Heard Shri Ashok Kumar, learned DR, and perused the appeal papers.The contention of the appellants in this appeal is that they were manufacturing moulding dyes of various sizes suitable for use solely or principally with the machines used for working ceramic products such as wall tiles and floor tiles falling under Chapter No. 69 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. The appellants claimed classification of moulding dyes under Heading 8466 of the Central Excise Tariff on the ground that these dyes are exclusively used with the machine tools falling under sub-heading 8466. The appellants, in app...
Mohd. Hanif and anr. Vs. Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corpn., Bilas ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1999
Reported in: 2000IAD(Delhi)101
ORDERDR. M.K. Sharma, J.1. This appeal is filed by the appellants who are the parents of deceased Abdul Kadir, who expired on account of injury sustained by him in a road accident. The appeal is preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act praying for setting aside the order dated 26.8.93 passed by the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi dismissing the claim petition. 2. The appellants herein filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs. 4,32,000/- against the respondents alleging that the respondent No. 3 was the driver of the offending vehicle and the respondents No.1 & 2 were the owners thereof. It was stated in the claim petition filed by the appel- lants that the son of deceased Abdul Kadir was aged about 23 years and was unmarried. He was working as a turner and his monthly income was Rs.1200/-. It was alleged that on 18.9.88 at about 6.10 a.m. when said Abdul Kadir was going on his bicycle towards Wazirabad Bridge was hit by a bus on the road leading to the...
Satyendra Jha and Others Vs. State and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1999
Reported in: 1999VIAD(Delhi)157; 82(1999)DLT110
ORDERK.S. Gupta, J.1. Aggrieved by the orders dated 6th August, 1998 and 18th August, 1998 of an Additional Sessions Judge, the petitioners have filed this revision petition.2. Said orders came to be passed while disposing of an application filed by the petitioners seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 226/98 under Sections 448/380/34 IPC, PS Mayapuri. This FIR No. 226/98 was lodged by respondent No. 3 on 2nd August, 1998 alleging that his wife, respondent No. 2 is the owner of property No. WZ-6, Lajwanti Garden. Ground and the half first floors of the property are under the tenancy of Life Insurance Corporation while the back portion on the first floor is in unauthorised occupation of Satyendra Jha, petitioner No.1. On 31st July, 1998 Ramesh Kumar informed him that the petitioners broke open the locks of one room, store and kitchen on the second floor in his possession and in addition to criminally trespassing into it, they also removed the goods belonging to him and legal action be ta...
Jindal LeasefIn Ltd. Vs. Rewa
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1999
Reported in: 2000IIAD(Delhi)145
ORDERMukul Mudgal, J.1. This is a summary suit under Order xxxvII CPC on behalf of the plain- tiff praying for recovery of Rs. 5,27,320/- Along with interest pendentelite & future interest. 2. The plaintiffs case is that one Maruti Esteem VX car, (Engine No. 562183, Chassis No. 198591 & Registration No. DL-8C-B-6452) was given to the defendant on hire-purchase basis in terms of Hire Purchase Agreement No. JLL/996/034 dated 18th September, 1996 between the plaintiff & the defendant. It is further the plaintiff's case that after paying 11.6 installments to the plaintiff, the defendant stopped paying further instal- ments. 3. In her application (IA. 11803/98) for leave to defend the suit, the applicant/defendant admits the purchase of Maruti Esteem Car from the plaintiff in terms of Hire Purchase Agreement entered into between the parties. It is also admitted by the applicant/defendant that she has paid 12 installments. The applicant/defendant has also admitted that in all 48 monthly inst...
Bharat Electronics Ltd. Vs. Stejac Enterprises (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1999
Reported in: 2000IAD(Delhi)193; 82(1999)DLT78
Manmohan Sarin, J.1. Plaintiff Company instituted this suit on 2.9.1993 for recovery of the sum of Rs. 7,78,565.50 (Rupees seven lakhs seventy-eight thousand five hundred sixty-five and paise fifty only) against the defendant. Plaintiff Company, which is engaged in the manufacture and selling of T.V. picture tubes of different specifications, claimed that various consignments of T.V. picture tubes had been supplied to the defendant Company. The amount claimed in the suit represents the principal amount of Rs. 3,86,197.50 p. (Rupees three lakhs eighty six thousand one hundred ninety-seven and paise fifty only) due on account of the invoices raised for the supply of T.V. picture tubes and after adjusting the amounts paid by the defendant. A further sum of Rs. 3,92,368.00 is claimed as interest, computed on the basis of varying rates of interest from 19 pre cent to 25 per cent per annum, as given in the statement of overdue interest, enclosed with the plaint. 2. After registration of the ...
Deep Chand @ Dipu Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1999
Reported in: 1999VIAD(Delhi)377; 2000CriLJ463; 82(1999)DLT339; 1999(51)DRJ528
ORDERDalveer Bhandari, J.1. This appeal is directed against he judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge Delhi dated 14.2.1978 by which the accused appellant was convicted under Section 363 IPC and sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment. It may be pertinent to mention that the appeal was admitted on 15.2.1978 and at that time, Shri, C.L. Prem, Advocate, appeared for the appellant. This appeal has been on Board for quite some time and no one has appeared for the appellant. thereforee, the Court appointed Shri Naveen Thakur, Advocate, as amices Curiae in this case. 2. Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of this appeal are recapitulated as under. 3. On 31.7.1976 Santosh and Asha, both were around 15 years of age, started for school but never reached the school. On search it was found that one Deep Chand @ Dipu abducted them and took them, to Khurja and brought them back to Delhi. On 22.8.1976 both the girls were found present at the waiting room of Old Delhi Railway Statio...
Reliable Testing Laboratory P. Ltd. and Another Vs. Smt. Gurcharan Kau ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1999
Reported in: 1999VIAD(Delhi)384
ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. In the suit instituted by the respondent as plaintiff seeking for a decree for recovery of possession of the suit premises by evicting the defendant there from and also for recovery of Rs. 27,000/- as arrears of rent and pendente lite and future interest the defendants filed their written statement. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties issues were framed and the suit was set down for recording evidence. The plaintiff examined P.W. 1 and his examination-in-chief was recorded. At that stage the defendants filed an application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking for amendment of the written statement by incorporating few paragraphs in the said written statement. It was stated in the said application by the defendants that subsequent events after the filing of the written statement could not be placed on record by the defendants and that the said events are necessary to be incorporated to determine the controversy between the par...
Hari Om Goel Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1999
Reported in: 2000IAD(Delhi)851
ORDERN.G. Nandi, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India involves a question whether a communication sent by the employee, by which he nilaterally purported to resign from his service from a future date and the acceptance of it by the employer can estops the petitioner from with-drawing the voluntary resignation before the expiry of notice period from which the resignation was intended to be effective?. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Building Supervisor in the institute of respondent No. 2 on 19.9.1983. He was thereafter promoted in the pay scale of Rs. 00-60-2300-EB-75-3200-100-3500 w.e.f. 5.8.1993; that the petitioner because of the constant harassment volunteered to give notice of one month relinquishing his office from a future date; that the petitioner vide notice dated 15.9.1997 expressed his desire of relinquishing the office resigning from the service of respondent No. 2 w.e.f. 15.10.1997; that thereafter the respondent accepted the notice da...
Collr. of C. Ex. Vs. Morarjee Gokuldas Spg. and Wvg.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-07-1999
Reported in: (1999)(114)ELT984TriDel
1. Both these appeals are filed by the Revenue against the common order-in-appeal passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay. In the impugned order, the Collector of Central Excise held that designed printing nickel cylinders are entitled for the benefit of Notification No. 201/87-C.E.2. When the case was called, none appeared on behalf of M/s. Morarjee Gokuldas Spg. & Wvg. Co. Ltd. The respondents, M/s. Shree Ram Mills Ltd. made a request to decide the appeal on merits.4. The contention of the Revenue is that Notification No. 201/87-C.E., dated 3-9-1987 grants exemption to the printing frames when used within the factory of production. In the present case, the designed printing nickel cylinders are different from the printing frames. The Revenue also contended that the intention of the Government was to grant exemption to the flat bed screens, which are quite different from the nickel cylinders. The Revenue also contended that there is difference in the value of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Next ›
- Last »