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.
Food Corporation of India Vs. Indian Council of Arbitration and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-2000
Reported in: 2000IIAD(Delhi)833; 2000(53)DRJ150
ORDERS.K. Mahajan, J.1. This order will dispose of this Petition and 332 connected Petitions filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. It is agreed by all the parties that the agreement under which the matter is sought to be referred to the arbitrator is the same in all the cases. Facts in short, relevant for decision of these matters, are : 2. The parties had entered into an agreement for milling of rice. Under the Agreement there was an arbitration clause which was as under : '21. ARBITRATION All disputes or differences whatever existing between the parties out of or relating to the agreement meaning and operation or effect of this agreement or the breach thereof shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of arbitration of the Indian Council of Arbitration and the award made in pursuance thereof shall be binding on the parties. The Sr. Regional Manager/Zonal Manager of the Corporation shall appoint/nominate arbitrator out of the persons...
Amijal Chemicals Vs. Designated Authority
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT338TriDel
1. In this appeal, appellant, M/s. Amijal Chemicals challenge the correctness of final order notified by the Designated Authority as per Ministry of Commerce notification dated 15-3-1999 regarding the anti-dumping investigation conducted by it on import of Citric Acid from China PR. Appellant is an importer of Citric Acid from China PR.Citurgia Biochemical's Ltd. approached the Designated Authority, representing the domestic industry, alleging dumping of Citric Acid originating in or exported from China PR. Designated Authority initiated investigation against import of Citric Acid from China by issuing Public Notice dated 18th March, 1998. Copies of the said Public Notice were sent to all importers of Citric Acid in India as well.Investigation was carried out for the period starting from 1st April, 1996 to 31st July, 1997. Manufacturers and exporters of Citric Acid in China did not cooperate in the investigation proceedings taken up by the Designated Authority. On the basis of materia...
System Dynamic Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT351TriDel
1. The case relates to import of 25 pieces of Colour Graphic Terminals along with Base Station. The goods were declared in the Bill of Entry as Colour Graphic Terminal only. Based on information, the customs authorities examined the consignment and found that in addition to the declared colour graphic terminals, the consignment contained base station and hard disc also. Accordingly, proceedings were initiated for confiscation of the goods under Section 111(d) and (m) of the Customs Act read with Section 3(2) of the Import and Export Control Act, 1947.2. During proceedings the appellants admitted that in previous cases also, that is, Bills of Entry Nos. 09590 dated 28-12-1991,11246 dated 30-3-1992, 742 dated 5-7-1992 and 1035 dated 8-7-1992, the same modus operandi had been adopted by the appellant to clear the excess goods by misdeclarihg the description and value of the consignment under import.Upon this finding, the Additional Collector vide impugned order confiscated the goods with...
Aiigma Vs. Designated Authority
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT333TriDel
1. These appeals arise out of Final Findings reached by the Designated Authority in the Antidumping investigation concerning import of calcium carbide from the People's Republic of China and Romania. The finding of the authority has been published as per Notification dated 22nd January, 1999 by the Ministry of Commerce in the Gazette of India Extraordinary. Appeal G/160/99-AD is by M/s. AIIGMA, an importer of calcium carbide from Romania. Appeals C/161-162/99/-AD are at the instance of M/s. DCW Ltd. and M/s. Senka Carbon, importers of calcium carbide from China. Contentions raised by the appellants in these appeals are identical. So, we consider it advantageous to dispose of these appeals by a common order.2. Main arguments advanced by the learned Counsel representing the appellants were two-fold. The first one was that domestic industry which moved the Designated Authority for initiating proceedings had no locus. The second argument was that the imports of calcium carbide from China ...
Haryana Sheet Glass Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2000
Reported in: (2000)(117)ELT316TriDel
1. Appeal E/1758/90-A and E/2633/98-A are at the instance of the assessee, while appeal E/107/91-A is by the Revenue.2. The short facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals are as follows : Appellant in E/1758/90-A and E/2633/98-A is a Public Limited Company engaged in the manufacture of sheet glass. Glass sheets manufactured by them are dispatched both in loose forms and also in packed condition. They claimed deduction on the cost of wooden crates, cost of handling, nailing expenses, freight from factory gate to depot, octroi, depot expenses like telephone charges, salary to staff, stationery etc., unloading charges at depot, agents' commission, theft pilferage non-delivery (for short, TPND) charges in transit and depot profits. Separate bills were issued, showing value of glass plus Central excise duty in one and value of crates and other expenses in another. They submitted a price list in Part I for the approval of the Department. In the said price list they claimed deductio...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Premium Mouldings
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2000
Reported in: (2000)LC114Tri(Delhi)
1. The present Reference Application has been filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi against the Tribunal's Final Order No.A/112- 115/99-NB(DB), dated 8-2-1999 1999 (111) E.L.T. 536 (T) holding that the Department has not been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, even on the basis of propandence (sic) of probability the allegation of clearance of goods without payment of duty.2. Under Annexure B to the Reference Application, the following points have been raised and prayer has been made at the end of the Grounds that the Tribunal may refer the case to the Hon'ble High Court for deciding the matter on the following questions of law arising in the case. "1. When the C. Ex. duty demanded in this case pertained to the false entries made in the name of M/s. PPAI which was established on the basis of evidences on records and statements of concerned persons, whether there was any need to make enquiry by the Department from other five job workers. 2. When the factor...
Dsm Idemitsu Limited Vs. Designated Authority
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT308TriDel
1. These two appeals are directed against the final findings of the Designated Authority published in the Ministry of Commerce Notification dated 14-5-1999 in the anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of EPDM from Japan. Appeal No. C/267/99-AD is filed by an Exporter DSM Idemitsu Limited, Japan. Appeal No. C/22/2000-AD is filed by M/s.Herdillia Unimers Limited (Domestic Industry).There is a delay of 167 days in filing the appeal. On going through the point raised in the grounds of appeal as well as reasons given in the application to condone delay, we are inclined to admit the appeal and, accordingly, delay is condoned.There is a delay of one day in filing the appeal. Delay is condoned and appeal was taken up for hearing to decide the issues on merits.4. By impugned order, the Designated Authority recommends imposition of definitive Anti-dumping duties on all imports of EPDM falling under Chapter 40 originating in or exported from Japan, excluding Poly Butadiene Rubber (PBR) f...
Hindustan Vidyut Products Ltd. Vs. Shri B.M. Patel
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2000
Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)29; 2000(53)DRJ32
ORDERK.S. Gupta, J.1. Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd. (name changed w.e.f. 26th March, 1998 to Hindustan Vidyut Products Ltd.) filed this suit, inter alia, alleging that it is a Public Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and has its registered office at Kanchenjunga Building, 7th Floor, 18-Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. It carries the business of manufacturing of aluminium conductors etc. Defendant was the Managing director of plaintiff company from its inception till 22nd June, 1973 and in that capacity he entered into a collaboration agreement on 7th November, 1971 with Sherkate Sahami-Zohbek Tohodan, Avenus Ekbatan, No. 223, Teheran, Iran (hereinafter referred to as the 'Sherkate Company') for supply of machineries as detailed in sub para (1) of Para 2 of the plaint. The terms and conditions of said collaboration agreement which have been set out in sub-paras (2) to (9) of Para 2 of the plaint, are as follows :- '2. Cost of Machinery : Rls. 12,000,000.00 (Rials Twel...
National Textile Corporation and Another Vs. V.C. JaIn and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2000
Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)407; 2000(53)DRJ358; (2000)IILLJ288Del
ORDERC.M. Nayar, J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 5th August, 1993 passed by Jaspal Singh, J., in C.W.P. No. 1509/79. The facts as enumerated in the judgment read as below :- 'On May 3, 1973 the petitioner was appointed as Materials Manager by the Maharashtra State Textile Corporation (hereinafter called MSTC) which was a Government of Maharashtra Undertaking. Initially, the petitioner was put on probation for a period of six months and on successful completion of the same he was confirmed in service w.e.f. December 6, 1973. On September 2, 1974 his salary was raised from Rs. 2,500/- to Rs. 2625/- per month. The raise was on account of his performance evaluation and in appreciation of the same. Following the Sick Textiles Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1974 (hereinafter called Act) the management of 21 of the 25 sick textile mills was transferred from the MSTC to the National Textile Corporation (hereinafter referred to as NTC) which is a Gov...
Mm Rubber Co. Ltd. Vs. M/S. Vinoo Patterns and Furniture Industry
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2000
Reported in: 2000IIAD(Delhi)544; 84(2000)DLT473; 2000(53)DRJ241; (2000)125PLR18
ORDERVijender Jain, J.1. This petition can be disposed of at this stage. 2. Counsel for the respondent has contended that the order was placed at Delhi and the same was booked by the sales officer of the petitioner and the said order was Ex. PW1/1. It has been contended by counsel for the respondents that as the cheque was issued from Bhopal, the cause of action arose in Bhopal and has stoutly defended the order passed by the Civil Judge. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Francis, learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the finding of the Civil Judge and contended that part of cause of action accrued in Delhi and if part of cause of action has accrued in Delhi, then the Court at Delhi will have the jurisdiction to try the suit. 4. I have given my careful consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both the parties. It is not gain saying that a suit can be filed in the Court in whose jurisdiction the cause of action has accrued. The court has to examine the question o...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »