Delhi Court January 2002 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.
Ashok Builders and Promoters Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2002
Reported in: 2002IIIAD(Delhi)891; 97(2002)DLT10; 2002(63)DRJ665
J.D. Kapoor, J.1. The short controversy involved for determination is whether the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred by Section 347E of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (in short the 'Act') even if the plea of the plaintiff that he is entitled to protection under the Amnesty Scheme under the relaxed Building Bye-laws (in short 'BBL') is accepted.2. Availing the benefit of the scheme, the plaintiff applied on 29.4.1999 requesting for regularizing the excess coverage and deviations as per relaxed BBL and deposited an amount of Rs. 3,71,430/- towards regularization fee and levy etc. on self assessment.3. Excess coverage and non- compoundable deviations have been detailed in para 12 of the written statement. Some of these are so huge that these need to be reproduced and are as under:-(b) Four-storeyed building with basement has been constructed against permissible 2 1/2 storeyed building with basement. Moreover, mezzanine and barsati floors have been constructed as a regula...
Ajay Singh Vs. State (Government of National Capital Territory of Delh ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2002
Reported in: 2002IVAD(Delhi)173; 2002CriLJ1970; 96(2002)DLT780; 2002(62)DRJ199
K.S. Gupta, J. 1. This appeal by accused/appellant is directed against the judgment dated 22nd February 2001 and order dated 24th February 2001 of an Additional Sessions Judge convicting him under Section 308 IPC and sentencing to undergo RI for 4 years. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 26th May 1998 information received at PS Chanakyapuri that a person was lying unconscious at the round about of Shanti Path and Niti Marg, was recorded in the DD at No. 15-A and copy thereof Ex. PW-10/a was entrusted to ASI Srikant, PW-10 for enquiry. PW-10 Along with Constable Chotte Lal, PW-4 reached the spot where he found Bus No. DL-IP-8557 standing. He also found that conductor of the bus (appellant) had been apprehended by public. PW-10 came to know that the injured had been removed to hospital and driver of the bus fled away. Appellant and bus were taken to the police station by PW-10. On reaching police station PW-10 got the information that injured Yash Pal Devgan, PW-1 had been...
Bhawna Sharma Vs. University of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2002
Reported in: 96(2002)DLT850; 2002(63)DRJ601
Manmohan Sarin, J.1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking quashing of condition stipulated in Clause IV at page 4 of the brochure, issued by the Delhi University for admission to post-Doctoral/ Post-graduate course to session-2002 of the Faculty of Medical Sciences University of Delhi. The entrance test is to be held on 10.2.2002. The petitioner seeks to be permitted to take the entrance examination and if selected on merit, to be enrolled in the post graduate course commencing 2002. 2. The petitioner had earlier appeared in the written screening test on 11.2.2001, and got selected for course in Ophthalmology in Lady Harding Medical College. It is a 2 years diploma course which commenced on 2.7.2001. 3. counsel for the petitioner submits that an enshrined in Article 51A Clause-J of the Constitution of India it is the duty of every citizen to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity. She is desirous of improving her prospects and qual...
B.N. Bajpai and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2002
Reported in: 2002IIAD(Delhi)557
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has questionedthe judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated21.5.1998 passed in OA No. 1882/97 wherein the Tribunal hasissued the following direction:12. In the result taking into accountthe facts and circumstances of thecase, the O.A. is allowed with thefollowing directions to respondents 1 -4: (a) to prepare and publish a finalseniority list of Principals withinone month from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this order, aftergiving reasonable time to theaffected persons to show causeagainst the provisional senioritylist: (b) during the aforesaid period, theyshall also complete the ACRs ofconcerned persons and take stepsto convene DPC meetings forpromotion of Principals toADEs/EOs immediately, and inany case within one month of thepublication of the seniority list.The DPC meetings shall becompleted as expeditiously aspossible, within one month inaccordance with the relevantrules/instructions; (c) Thereafter, promotion ...
Standard Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Gyan Chand JaIn and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2002
Reported in: 97(2002)DLT290; 2002(62)DRJ733; 2002RLR317
S.N. Kapoor, J.1. In these matters, the question of condensation of delay is required to be decided along with interpretation of term 'rent'.2. First the facts are given in brief hereinbelow to appreciate the respective contention of the parties. On 1st April, 1968, the premises in question was let out to Standard Pharmaceutical Ltd. 24, Park Street, Calcutta. The case of the plaintiff-respondent was that after the lapse of years, rent was increased from Rs. 2,000/- to Rs. 2,500/- w.e.f. 1st April, 1983 and after five years the rent was further increased to Rs. 3,000/- w.e.f. 1st April, 1988. The plaintiff landlord by notice dated 5th January, 1991 - after the amended Rent Control Act came into force on 1st December, 1988- gave a notice and increased the rent by 10%. Consequently, the rent became Rs. 3.300/- per month up to 31st July, 1991. Thereafter, they failed to pay the rent. The plaintiff filed a petition for eviction before the Rent Controller. The proceedings before the Rent Co...
Shri Ram Kumar, Vs. Nct of Delhi and ors. and Municipal Corporation of ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-2002
Reported in: 97(2002)DLT184b
A.K. Sikri, J. 1. All these Writ Petitions raise common question of law. The petitioners in these Writ Petitions have applied for the post of Primary Teacher. In certain cases advertisement for the aforesaid post were issued by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as MCD, for short) while in the other cases the advertisements were issued by the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (hereinafter referred to as DSSSB, for short) for the aforesaid posts in MCD as well as New Delhi Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as NDMC, for short).2. All these petitioners have acquired their B.Ed degree from Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishvavidyalaya, Varanasi (hereinafter referred to as SSV, for short) or from Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as HSS, for short).3. The respondents refused to entertain the applications of the petitioners and did not consider their case for appointment to the post on the ground that the aforesaid degree issue...
Arihant Spinning Mills Vs. C.C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2002
Reported in: (2002)(80)ECC333
1. The appellants manufacture yarn falling under Chapter Nos. 52 & 55.The Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise vide his Order dated 18.2.97 disallowed the modvat credit of Rs. 2,06,245 availed by them on the items Electric motors, Electrical goods, LT Power Capacitors, Static Converter supply transformer, Vacuum Cleaner, Adhesives and Transformer (of power handling capacity below 75 kW) and spares of electrical goods as capital goods under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. He further imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000 on the party. The party filed an appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide his Order dated 9.2.99 allowed the appeal relating to the modvat credit on electric motor, LT Power Capacitor, static converter supply transformer, electric transformer and electrical goods. He however rejected the appeal relating to the modvat credit on Adhesives, Vacuum cleaners and Transformers of power handling capacity below 75 kW. He also set aside the penalty imposed on the party. In ...
Anusika Autolite Ltd. Vs. C.C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2002
Reported in: (2002)(80)ECC328
1. The appellant manufacture Automobile Head Lamps and its Accessories falling under Chapter sub-heading 8512.00. They are also availing modvat credit facility under Rules 57A & 57Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. They had purchased one Glass Plunger (Die) and availed modvat credit amounting to Rs. 2,31,000 on their RG 23C Pt. II entry NO. 4/2 dt. 10.10.97. This Glass Plunger Die was sent to their branch office at Firozabad for getting the Glass Lenses manufactured from the other units as job workers. They were issued a show cause notice dated 4.5.98 by the Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur in which it was alleged that the noticee had no facility to manufacture glass and glass lenses in their factory premises and the said Glass Plunger Die was not usable in their factory premises. It is alleged that they made a written declaration in their letter dated 20.7.97 that the said Plunger Die had been put into use in the production of excisable goods whereas the assessee did not ...
industrial Gases Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Jaipur-ii
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2002
Reported in: (2002)(141)ELT728TriDel
1. In these 4 applications the applicants have requested for waiver of pre-deposit of Central Excise duty and penalties as imposed as under :(1) M/s. Indl. Gases Ltd. - Rs. 1,59,05,075/- Duty - Rs. 1,59,05,075/- Penalty(2) Shri P.K. Biswas - Rs. 1 lac Penalty(3) Shri T. Maitra - Rs. 1 lac Penalty(4) Shri L.R. Garg - Rs. 1 lac Penalty 2. Shri Harish Chander, learned Advocate, submitted that the applicant No. 1 M/s. Industrial Gases Ltd. have been directed to pay the duty in respect of Oxygen Gas, Nitrogen Gas, and Liquid Nitrogen for the period from October, 1995 to July, 2000 by confirming the show cause notice dated 25-10-2000; that they are not manufacturer of the impugned goods as they had leased out their Plant with facility of staff for maintenance for giving the safety to Hindustan Zinc Ltd.; that agreements with Hindustan Zinc Ltd. (HZL) were executed from time to time and perusal of the said agreement will reveal that HZL has been described as owner of the factory and the appl...
Garrison Polysacks Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Vadodara
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2002
Reported in: (2002)(143)ELT575TriDel
2. The appellants have filed the Misc. Application seeking recall of the Stay Order No. S/646/2001/NB-D, dated 22-11-2001 vide which their stay application was decided ex parte on the ground that the Counsel could not put up appearance.3. We have gone through the application and heard both the sides. For the reasons mentioned in the application, we find that it is a fit case to recall the stay order dated 22-11-2001 vide which the stay application of the appellants was dismissed without going into the merits of the case on account of their non-appearance.6. With the consent of both the sides, we proceed to hear the stay application.7. Through this stay application, the appellants have sought waiver of pre-deposit of the duty amount of Rs. 11,09,313/- which had been confirmed on them through the impugned order-in-appeal dated 10-4-2001 by the Commissioner (Appeals).8. While arguing the stay application, the learned Counsel has contended that the Modvat credit had been wrongly disallowe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »