Delhi Court February 2000 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.
inder SaIn Sharma and ors. Vs. Registrar, Delhi Co-operative Societies ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-29-2000
Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)382; 86(2000)DLT196; 2000(54)DRJ716; (2000)126PLR48
ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, dated 26.8.1997 as also the order dated 7.11.1997 passed by the Appellate Authority, namely, the Financial Commissioner, Delhi. 2. The petitioners were members of respondent No. 3/Society. The Society vide its General Body Meeting held on 6.7.1996 and 27.7.1996 passed a Resolution expelling 35 members including the petitioners herein for nonpayment of the Installment which was required to be paid in terms of the demand of the Society. The aforesaid order of expulsion was sent to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies for confirmation on the basis of which the Registrar, Cooperative Societies initiated proceedings on which notices were issued to the petitioners as well. During the proceedings before the Registrar, it was contended on behalf of the Society that all the 35 members including the petitioners were expelled for non-payments of the first installment of cost of lan...
Jai Bhagwan and Others Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-29-2000
Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)440
ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. In all these writ petitions issues raised on fact and on law are similar in nature and thereforee, I propose to dispose of all the writ petitions by this common judgment/order. 2. The petitioners were owners of land situated at Revenue Estate of Village Samaipur. Land owned by the petitioners was acquired by Delhi Administration for the planned development of Delhi pursuant to notifications under 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and award was passed. 3. The Union of India promulgated a scheme in the year 1961 by virtue of which persons whose lands had been acquired for planned development of Delhi became eligible for allotment of alternative plot in lieu of their land acquired by the Government. The said scheme laid down general directions to regulate acquisition, development and disposal of lands in Delhi, avowedly, with the object to control land values in Delhi as well as to secure the development of Delhi according to plan. An Act namely - The Delhi Deve...
M. Shafi Goroo Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-29-2000
Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)542; 2000CriLJ2172; 85(2000)DLT245; 2000(53)DRJ194
ORDERM.S.A. Siddiqui, J. 1. This revision is directed against the order dated 16.12.1998 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi directing framing the charge under Section 304-A IPC against the petitioner. 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 26.4.1996, while playing Golf at the Army Golf Course, the petitioner played a stroke in a rash and negligent manner, causing the fatal injury on right parieto-temporal region of his Caddie, namely, Amit James. Immediately thereafter, Amit James was removed to Safdar Jung Hospital. On 2.5.1996, the deceased succumbed to the said injury in the hospital. On 27.4.1996, deceased's father Soloman Jamesh lodged the FIR at the P.S. Delhi Cantt. regarding the alleged incident. Investigation pursuant thereto culminated in submission of a charge sheet under Section 304-A IPC against the petitioner. By the order dated 16.12.1998, the learned Magistrate explained particulars of the offence to the petitioner in the form of a charge under Sec...
R.K. Saxena Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-29-2000
Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)728; 86(2000)DLT155; 2000(53)DRJ610
ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. The present writ petition is directed against the communication dated 1.7.1999 issued by the Respondent/Authority canceling the bid of the petitioner in respect of Plot No. 109, Site-I, Shankar Road, Delhi-110007 on the ground of non-payment of premium within the stipulated period. By the aforesaid communication the petitioner was further informed that the earnest money deposited by the petitioner had also been forfeited and the petitioner was informed that the cheque towards refund of premium after deducting the forfeited money would be sent to him. 2. Subsequent to an advertisement issued by the Respondent/Authority an auction sale was held by the Delhi evelopment Authority in respect of a two side open plot being Plot No. 109, Site-I , Shankar Road, Delhi measuring about 83.12 Sq. Mts. Terms and Conditions of the aforesaid sale by auction have been placed on record. One of the aforesaid Conditions was that the successful bidder would have to pay a sum equi...
Chand Khan Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-29-2000
Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)850; 2000CriLJ2645
ORDERM.S.A. Siddiqui, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 30.01.1997 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi in Sessions case No. 14/96 convicting the petitioner under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short the 'Act') and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of rupees one lac or in default to suffer further simple imprisonment for two months. 2. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that on 3.11.1996 a police party led by Inspector S.P. Kaushik (P.W. 5), upon secret information received, apprehended the appellant in Hanuman Lane, Baba Khadak Singh Marg, New Delhi. The appellant was given the option of being searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate but he declined the offer. At that time the appellant was holding a polythene bag in his right hand. On search, the said bag was found to contain 855 gms. of heroin which was seized vide seizure memo ...
Mohd. Raffique Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-29-2000
Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)861; 2000CriLJ2401
ORDERM.S.A. Siddiqui, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and the order dated 20.4.99 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in Sessions Case No. 118/95 convicting the appellant under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short the 'Act') and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1 lakhs or in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year. 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 1st April, 1995 at 9.45 A.M. a police party led by Sub Inspector Satpal (P.W. 6), upon information received, apprehended the appellant in the Gali Masjid Wali, Mohalla Shahganj Delhi. The appellant was given the option (Ex. P.W. 3/8) of being searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. He declined the offer. Thereupon SHO P.L. Puri (P.W. 2), directed the Constable Jamil Ahmad (P.W. 4) to search the appellant. Pursuant to the said direction, Constable Jamil Ahmad (P.W. 4) searched...
Shri Krishna and 12 ors. Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2000
Reported in: (2000)(69)ECC305
1. These 13 appeals were heard together as they arise out of the same impugned order and are being disposed of by this common order. No appeal was filed by Shri Shivraj Tiwari, Shri Guru Dev, Shri Mangla Prasad and Shri Rakesh Kumar.2. The facts of the case in brief are that acting on specific information, Customs Officers intercepted 13 bundles of carpets at Tikonia Railway Station. These 13 bundles of carpets were found to contain 133 pcs. of carpets. When the Asstt. Station Master was contacted he informed that none had turned up till then to take delivery of the carpets. The Asstt. Station Master also informed that proper invoice has not been sent alongwith goods; that 'A Kachha Memo' has been received which bears railway mark; that the goods were booked from Bhadhohi for Tikonia. As the officers had specific intelligence in the case that the goods were meant for export to Nepal illegally, the goods were examined and seized. On examination and trade opinion obtained the goods were...
Commr. of C. Ex. Vs. Camphor and Allied Products
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2000
Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT531TriDel
1. The issue involved in this appeal filed by Revenue is whether the product 'Amberone, manufactured by M/s. Camphor Allied Products Ltd. is classifiable under sub-heading 2914.90 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, as decided by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order or under sub-heading 3302.90, as claimed by the Revenue.Shri H.K. Jain, learned S.D.R., submitted that as per the test report dated 15-1-1993 in respect of the sample drawn on 13-4-1992, the sample was in the form of light Pale Yellow colour liquid having woody odour; it was mixture of odoriferous substances other than organic chemical.He further mentioned that on the request of the respondents, another sample of the impugned product was drawn and sent to the Chief Chemist on 27-9-1993; that as Chief Chemist desired to have a fresh sample, again a fresh sample was sent to him on 30-7-1996; that as per his test report dated 28-1-1997 "The sample is in the form of Pale Yellow viscous liquid having p...
Kerala Agro Machinery Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2000
Reported in: (2000)(117)ELT553TriDel
1. South Regional Bench referred this case for decision by a Larger Bench by reference order dated 2-7-1996. For a proper understanding of the reference order, we read the relevant portion of the reference order : "...In the context of fork lift trucks in the case reported in 1993 (63) E.L.T. 542, the Tribunal after taking into consideration the scope of the tariff description as to what constitute classification of equipment held that tyre for fork lift trucks will be classifiable under heading 4011.91. However, in a subsequent decision involving similar issue, the North Regional Bench of the Tribunal in the case reported in 1996 (83) E.L.T. 515 has held a contrary view after taking note of the decision in the case reported in 1993 (63) E.L.T. 542 and classification was held to be 4011.99. and 4013.99 in respect of tyres and tubes used by the fork lift trucks. It is seen that the board has also changed its view in the instructions issued vide letter No. 99/222/89-CX-3, dated 6-3-1990...
Vijay Flexible Containers Pvt. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-28-2000
Reported in: (2000)(118)ELT72TriDel
1. This appeal has come before us on a reference made by a Bench of two Members. At the time when the case came before that Bench for hearing.Learned Counsel representing the appellant submitted that the issue identical to the one raised herein has been referred to a Larger Bench as seen in the reported decision, 1995 (80) E.L.T. 203 as Collector of Central Excise, Bombay v. Vijay Flexible Containers Pvt. Ltd. The case referred to a Larger Bench as per the above order was decided by a Bench of 5 Members as per Final Order 118/98-C, dated 6-3-1998 reported as Collector of Central Excise, Bombay v. Vijay Flexible Containers Pvt. Ltd., 1998 (100) E.L.T. 158. This case was not posted before the said Larger Bench. Hence it has come up before us.2. Question decided by the earlier Larger Bench was in relation to classification of printed outer shells and slides and also hinged lid blanks (H.L. Blanks) under the then existing tariff entry. The classification lists considered by the Bench were...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »