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.
Adhunik Detergents Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: (2000)(119)ELT342TriDel
1. The appellants are manufacturers of washing powder, which is liable to duty under Chapter 3402.90 for Central Excise Act. The impugned order has confirmed duty demand of over Rs. 7 lakhs and imposed a penalty of Rs. 50 thousand on the appellants. The duty demand is on the ground that the deductions claimed by the appellants from the sale price (for the purpose of arriving at the assessable value of the goods under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act) were not correctly made.Demand of over Rs. 5 lakhs related to the deduction towards handling and transportation charges, over Rs. 46 thousand related to interest on security deposits made by the dealers who purchased the goods from the appellants and over Rs.1.9 lakhs related to deduction claimed towards Sales Tax.2. The demand has been made (under Proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act) for the extended period on the ground of suppression of facts, while filing price list.3. The appellants have submitted that the handling...
Kavita and Others Vs. M.C.D.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)1
ORDERA.K. Sikri, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition who are 32 in number have done their JBT/ETE Course from District Institute of Education and Training (for short 'DIET'). It is the case of the petitioners that DIET was specially opened by the respondent-MCD to train and prepare the persons with Specialised Education Teachers for the Primary/Elementary Schools being run by MCD. It was the Policy of the respondent that all the students who qualified from DIETS would be absorbed as Primary School Teachers before the placements could be offered to candidated with basic for higher qualifications i.e. B.Ed., M.Ed. etc. The petitioners have done two years ETE Diploma course. They joined the course in 1996. Although in normal course they would have completed this course in the year 1998. However, in one or more papers, these petitioners could not qualify and, thereforee, they appeared in supplementary examination conducted later on and qualified for Diploma Course in January, 1999. I...
Mahabir Prasad Gupta and Another Vs. State and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: 2000IVAD(Delhi)121; 2000CriLJ3759; 85(2000)DLT56; 2000(53)DRJ777; 2000(2)JCC352
R.S. Sodhi, J.1. Rule D.B. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners pray for a mandamus quashing FIR No. 481 of 1997 registered with Police Station, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi, under Section 406 IPC and further seek a declaration that the respondents are acting in abuse and excess of authority conferred by law and are subjecting the petitioners to harassment of criminal proceedings without there being any sufficient ground for taking any action against the petitioners. 2. Brief facts of the case are that an information was given in writing by Govind Singh Bisht, authorised signatory of Viacom Electronics Private Limited, to the Station House Officer, Police Station, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi, to the effect : 'VIACOM Electronics (P) Ltd. office: D-96, Shib Ram Complex, Munirka, New Delhi -110067. 06th November, 1997 Station House Officer Police Station Vasant Vihar New Delhi Reg. Non-delivery of consignment Dear Sir, we inform you that we had sended co...
Jagdish Mitter Maini Vs. Canara Bank and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)137; (2001)IILLJ394Del; 2000(3)SLJ216(Delhi)
ORDERCyriac Joseph, J.1. This case is listed for rehearing. Learned counsel for the parties submit that they have no further submissions to make and hence the case may be disposed of in view of the submissions already made. Accordingly the petition is being disposed of. 2. The petitioner was an employee of the Lakshmi Commercial Bank Limited (L.C.B. Ltd.) which was amalgated with the Canara Bank in 1985. The respondent is the Canara Bank. While the petitioner was working as manager of the Lakshmi Commercial Bank, Chandni Chowk Branch, Delhi, he was placed under suspension vide Lakshmi Commercial Bank Head Office Letter No. Estt./PLC/84 dated 27-2-1984. Subsequently a memorandum of charge sheet dated 26.3.1984 was served on the petitioner. The petitioner submitted his reply dated 25.4.1984 denying all the allegations against him. Before taking further action against the petitioner pursuant to the said chargesheet, the Reserve Bank of India in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-sect...
Anaro Begum Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: 2000IVAD(Delhi)314; 86(2000)DLT520
ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking for a writ of mandamus directing respondent Corporation to cancel the allotment of shop No.12. Turkman Gate, New Delhi in favor of respondent No. 4 and to allot and handover possession of the said shop to the petitioner. The petitioner in the writ petition alleged that she was residing with her husband at property No. 3387/VIII, Turkman Gate, New Delhi, which property however, was demolished in 1975-1976. It is stated that the said property was being used both for commercial as well as residential purposes. On account of the aforesaid demolition a demolition slip No. 9437 dated 17.4.1976 was issued in the name of the husband of the petitioner for residential purposes in lieu of which he was allotted quarter No. 368, G.T. Road, Shahdara, Delhi. The petitioner herein made a claim before the respondent that so far the demolition of the property from where commercial activities were carried ou...
Anil Mahajan Vs. Commissioner of Customs and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: 2000IIIAD(Delhi)369; 2000CriLJ2094; 84(2000)DLT854; 2000(53)DRJ501; 2000(69)ECC758; 2000LC36(Delhi)
ORDERCyriac Joseph, J.1. This is a petition filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code for grant of bail to the petitioner who is alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 132 and 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The offence under Section 132 of the Act is bailable and the offence under Section 135(1)(b) of the Act is non-bailable. The petitioner was arrested on 4.8.1999 and he has been in judicial custody since 5.8.1999. After completion of investigation a complaint has been filed in the Court against the petitioner. Even though the petitioner filed an application for bail in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge it was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 30.9.1999 observing that the petitioner is involved in a serious economic offence which has been committed with a cool calculated mind with deliberate designs and with an eye on personal profits regardless of the consequences to the commun...
M/S. Radhey Shayam Bansal Vs. M/S. Indian Farmers Fertilisers Cooperat ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: 85(2000)DLT484; 2000(56)DRJ338
ORDERJ.B. Goel, J.1. This is a petition under Section 41 read with Schedule II of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short 'the Act') seeking injunction against invoking and encashing of a Bank Guarantee. 2. The respondent had awarded to the petitioner the work of construction of 52 Nos. Type 'D' residences for IFFCO Township at Aonla, near Bareilly (U.P.) by means of letter No. 9/6/142 dated 10.10.1985 followed by a formal contract executed on 16.12.1985. The total cost of the project was Rs. 1,93,21,192.40 and the work was to be completed within a period 15 months. The contract provided for furnishing by the petitioner of performance bank guarantee equivalent to 5% of the value of the work valid for a period of 12 months till after the completion of the work. Bank Guarantee No. 23/87 dated 22.12.1987 in the sum of Rs. 11, 50,000/- of State Bank of Indore, Gandhidham Branch was furnished. The case of the petitioner is that they completed the work to the satisfaction of the respondent and ...
Sundari Bala Vs. Lt. Governor and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: 2000VAD(Delhi)604; 86(2000)DLT505
ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. In the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged the legality of the order dated 15.2.1990 passed by the Special Secretary of Delhi Administration rejecting the claim of the petitioner for allotment of alternative land. By this writ petition the petitioner also seeks for a direction to the respondents for allotment of an alternative plot in favor of the petitioner in terms of the scheme adopted by the respondents in the year 1961. 2. Land of the petitioner measuring 9 bids was comprised in Khasra No.1189/317 situated in Village Kilokari was acquired by the respondent. In respect of the aforesaid acquisition proceedings an award was passed on 16.5.1961. The petitioner received compensation as admitted by her sometime in the month of April, 1969 and the construction standing on the said land was demolished by the respondent after acquisition of the land sometime in the month of March, 1969. The petitioner relies upon the scheme adopted by the responde...
Anand Darbari Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: 84(2000)DLT247; 2000(53)DRJ70
ORDERAnil Dev Singh, J.1. Rule D.B. 2. By means of the instant Letter's Patent Appeal the appellant challenges the order of the learned Single Judge dated January 27, 2000 whereby the prayer of the appellant for directing the Appointments Committee of Cabinet (for short 'ACC') to reconsider the decision refusing to extend the tenure of the appellant as Chairman-cum-Managing Director of Cement Corporation of India beyond January 1, 1999 till March 31, 2001, was declined. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned Single Judge. It is admitted on both sides that initially the appellant was appointed as Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the Cement Corporation of India on January 2, 1989 for a period of 5 years. Thereafter he was granted two extensions. The Public Enterprises Selection Board (for short 'the PESB') recommended the case of the appellant for extension beyond January 1, 1999 to March 31, 2001 on the ground that BIF...
Phoolwati @ Phullo Vs. National Capital Territory of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-2000
Reported in: 2000IIAD(Delhi)537; 2000CriLJ1613; 84(2000)DLT177; 2000(53)DRJ165
ORDERAnil Dev Singh, J.1. Rule D.B. 2. This is a writ petition whereby the petitioner Phoolwati @ Phullo claims compensation on account of custodial death of her husband Jaswant Singh. It is the case of the petitioner that on December 2, 1992 at about 10.00 A.M. seven police personnel of Police Station Samaypur Badli and three persons, namely, Udai Singh, Jai Prakash and Kishan, came to the residence of Balbir Singh, resident of village Siraspur. Balbir Singh was identified by Jai Prakash. The police personnel enquired from Balbir Singh about the whereabouts of his cousin Om Prakash, Jagdish and others. As Balbir Singh failed to furnish the whereabouts of his cousins he was asked to accompany them to the police station. By this time deceased Jaswant Singh, who was the elder brother of Balbir Singh intervened, whereupon one of the police personnel stated they should be beaten to death. Sub Inspector Ramesh Narang, who was part of the police party, fired in the air as a result whereof Ja...
- ‹ Prev
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- Next ›
- Last »