Delhi Court September 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.
Bank of Baroda Vs. Kayenkay Agencies and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-10-2002
Reported in: [2003]114CompCas431(Delhi)
Usha Mehra, J.1. The Bank of Baroda, appellant/plaintiff filed a suit for recovery, inter alia, on the grounds that the respondents had obtained the clean bill purchase facility by presenting a cheque dated 26th September, 1972 for Rs. 10,000/- drawn on State Bank of India, Ghaziabad. The cheque on presentation was dishonoured. Besides this clean bill purchase facility, the respondents also availed over draft facility to the tune of Rs. 5,000/- which amounts the respondents failed to repay in spite of notice, hence, the suit.2. By the impugned judgment the suit was dismissed primarily on the ground that the appellant bank failed to prove that clean bill purchase facility was availed by the respondents. Secondly over-draft facility was without consideration.3. Aggrieved by this judgment present appeal was preferred. The issue before this court is; whether the appellant bank was required to prove an admitted document Ex.PW-3/1 by virtue of which the respondents admitted their liability. ...
Roxy Industrial Corpn., Shri S.C. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Adj)
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: (2002)(84)ECC513
(1) M/s. Roxy Industrial Corpn. Duty : Rs. 4,49,27,298 Penalty : Rs. 1,75,00,000 2. Shri Harish Chander, learned Advocate, submitted that the Customs duty has been demanded and penalties have been imposed by the Commissioner under the impugned Order on the ground that the raw material imported by them is not available and they had not exported the goods as undertaken by them; that the impugned Order has been passed by the Commissioner ex-parte without hearing them; that they had applied to the Director General Foreign Trade for extension of time for meeting with the export obligation; that the Adjudicating Authority should have waited in deciding the matter as the proceedings were still pending before the DGFT. In this regard reliance has been placed on the decision in the case of Polar Industries Ltd. v. CCE AIR 2000 SC 3503.Reliance has also been placed on the decision in the case of Shri Ram Mills v. UOI 2000 (123) ELT 448 (AP) wherein it was held that under the Scheme, para 128 pr...
Maruti Udyog Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: (2003)(161)ELT248TriDel
1. The issue involved in this appeal filed by M/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd., is regarding the duty chargeable on the inputs cleared as such.2. Shri Ravi Raghvan, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants manufacture motor vehicle and avail of CENVAT Credit on the duty paid on inputs; that in the case of shortage of parts in their spare parts division which is situated outside the factory premises, the parts obtained for the manufacturing division are transferred to the spare parts division that differential demand has been confirmed against them besides imposing penalty on the ground that the duty of excise is payable on the selling price of the spare parts division. The learned Advocate further submitted that the demand of duty is for the period from 20-1-2001 to 31-5-2001; that during the relevant period the inputs were cleared to spare parts division (SPD) on reversal of CENVAT Credit in terms of provisions of Rule 57AB; that w.e.f. 1-3-2001 in view of the amendment carried out to R...
Commissioner of Customs, Icd Vs. Sewa Ram and Bros.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: (2003)(151)ELT344TriDel
1. Revenue has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Customs holding - "In view of the foregoing deliberations and findings, I order absolute confiscation of the goods in question under Section 111 (d) of the Customs Act, 1962. As the absolute confiscation should meet ends of justice 1 do not impose any penalty on the noticee." 2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the respondent herein imported serviceable rags totally valued at Rs. 31,86,854/-. They did not clear the goods, therefore, a show cause notice was issued to the importer asking him to explain as to why the goods should not be confiscated under Section 111(d) of Customs Act, 1962 and why a penalty should not be imposed under Section 112 of the Act ibid. The respondent herein did not respond to the Show cause notice nor did they come forward to clear the goods. I however, they had abandoned the goods and intimated their intention on 17.11.2000. The Commissioner adjudi...
Kapurthala Northern India Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: (2003)(86)ECC155
1. The issue involved in this appeal, filed by M/s. Kapurthala Northern India Tanners Ltd., is whether the benefit of Notification No. 2/94-CE dated 1.3.94 is available in respect of Bone Tallow manufactured by them.2. Shri K.K. Anand, Learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants, besides manufacturing leather goods, manufacture Bone tallow in respect of which they claimed exemption under Notification No. 2/94; that the Additional Commissioner under Adjudication Order No. 24/2001 dated 12.4.2001 confirmed the demand of duty denying the benefit of said notification and imposed penalty on the ground that Notification No.2/94 exempts only Mutton Tallow and not Bone Tallow manufactured by them; that on appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) also rejected their appeal under the impugned Order. The learned Advocate, further, submitted that in trade parlance Bone Tallow and Mutton Tallow are understood to be the same commodity and affidavit of two persons were also produced to that effect; th...
Parents Teacher Association Vs. M.C.D.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: 101(2002)DLT34
Khan, J.1. Petitioner is an association of teachers and parents of MCD Primary School, Bhola Nath Nagar, Shahdara. It has taken upon itself the cause of MCD related to title/transfer of 200 sq.yds. plot No. 42 and has filed this petition for direction to respondents 2 & 3 to either transfer this plot to MCD or to acquire it for MCD so as to facilitate the smooth functioning of the school.2. Petitioner's case is that plot 40 to 48 comprising khasra Nos. 1374/1068 at Village Chandrawali were declared as evacuee property and placed under the management of Delhi Administration which was later succeeded by R-3. R-1 (MCD) established a primary school on these plots sometime in 1959 which at present had 800 students on its rolls. This was supported and evidenced by office order dated 6.5.1968 passed by Regional Settlement Commissioner placing 330 plots at the disposal of R-2 including plots No. 40 to 48 and letter dated 27.10.1997 addressed by R-3 to R-1 and by the Revenue Authority's report ...
Shri Surinder Kumar Sood Vs. Delhi Development Authority and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: 101(2002)DLT110
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. Rule.2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for disposal.3. The petitioner got himself registered under the New Pattern Scheme, 1979 (NPS) and on 26.3.1993 he was allotted a MIG flat at Narela. The petitioner was aggrieved by the fact that the charges asked for the flat were higher and also the flat was not of the MIG category for which the petitioner was registered.4. There were number of petitioners having similar grievances arising from allotment of such flats. These flats were under the incremental category where by the allottees had the right to construct further. These writ petitions were disposed of vide order dated 25.4.1995 in CW No. 4989/1993. The order is in the following terms:'CW 4989 & C.M.No. 8775/1993The challenge in this writ petition is to the allotment of flats to the petitioner at the impugned rates. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that flats allotted to the petitioners are of increm...
Anil Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: 101(2002)DLT31
Vijender Jain, J.1. This order shall disposed of CW 2933/99, CW No. 6303/99, CW No. 6763/99, CW No. 6656/99, CW No. 6613/2000, CW No. 6087/2000, CW No. 1667/99 and CW No. 340/2000.2. Rule.3. Counsel for the petitioners have contended that the scheme of the Government with regard to casual labourer would be applicable to the respondent/National open School. This writ petition has been filed seeking direction that the respondent may continue to engage the petitioners as casual labourers as long as there is work requiring engagement of casual labourers and not to engage any fresh casual labourer in the place of the petitioners.4. On the other hand, Mr. Anil Kumar, counsel for the respondent/National Open School has contended that the scheme of the Government of India is not applicable to the respondent No. 2 and that question is no more rest integra. He has invited my attention to a judgment of Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 535/94 entitled Shri Manik Chand Prasad v. Central Boar...
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Shri P.D. Sharma and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: 110(2004)DLT821; 2004(75)DRJ406
A.K. Sikri, J.1. Union of India has filed this writ petition impugning judgment and order dated 11.7.2001 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi thereby allowing OA.1486/98 filed by the respondents herein. The facts are in narrow compass which may first be recapitulated.2. When Doordarshan was initially started as part of All India Radio, services of various categories of employees were initially taken on contract basis. These included Sound Record lists and Lighting Assistants. They were not given regular pay-scales which were given to their counter-parts in the Film Division under the same Ministry, namely, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. They approached Supreme Court by filing various Civil Writs, leading case being filed CWP.No.240/89. These writ petitions were allowed vide judgment dated 12.4.90 which is reported as Y.K. Mehta and others Vs . Union of India and another : (1989)ILLJ255SC . The Supreme Court found that although these persons ...
Smt. Usha Sachdeva Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: 2003(68)DRJ658
A.K. Sikri, J.1. This writ petition is aimed against the judgment and order dated 12th August, 1999 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi whereby the Original Application filed by the petitioner herein was dismissed. The petitioner has spelled out the issues which arise for consideration and a cursory glimpse thereof would indicate the nature of controversy involved in the present case. These issues as (sic) by the petitioner are to the following effect:1. Where the respondent can revise the seniority list after a lapse of nearly ten years without affording an opportunity to petitioner to challenge such revision.2. Whether the respondents are justified in promoting junior to the petitioner to higher grade and reverting the petitioner to the lower grade, when the respondent No. 3 who superseded the petitioner did not possess necessary qualification and experience which were required for the post.3. Whether on restructuring the respondents are justifie...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »