Delhi Court January 2003 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2003 Page 4 of about 205 results (0.013 seconds)Connaught Plaza Restaurant (P) Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (2003)(154)ELT187TriDel
1. In these two Appeals, filed by M/s. Connaught Plaza Restaurants Pvt.Ltd. and Revenue, arising out of two Order-in-Original Nos. 12/2000 and 40/2001 both passed by the Commissioner, Central Excise, the issue involved is whether the process of conversion of 'soft serve mix' to 'soft serve' amounts to manufacture, whether the product 'soft serve' is classifiable under Heading 04.04 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act (or Alternatively under Sub-Heading 2108.91) or under Heading No. 21.05 as Ice-cream as claimed by Revenue, and whether the benefit of Small Scale Exemption is available in respect of the impugned product.2.1 Shri V. Lakshmi Kumaran, learned Advocate, submitted that M/s.Connaught Plaza Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. (in short Connaught Plaza) are engaged in the business of selling burgers, nuggets, shakes, soft-serve, etc. through its fast foods restaurants, known as McDonalds Family Restaurants; that they procure soft serve mix and milk shake mix in the liquid form f...
Tag this Judgment!Ojaswi Marble and Granite Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in: (2004)(163)ELT114TriDel
1. Appellants filed this appeal against the adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise. The issue involved in this case is in respect of the goods manufactured by the appellants. Appellants claimed the classification of goods under heading 2505 of Central Excise Tariff as dolomite slabs and tiles whereas the revenue want to classify the goods under heading 2504 of the Central Excise Tariff as marble slabs and tiles.2. Both the sides submit that now the CBEC has issued a circular dated 17-7-02 in respect of classification of marble slabs and tiles whereby the Board, after taking into consideration the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Akbar Badruddin Jiwani v. C.C. reported in 1990 (47) E.L.T. 161 (S.C.), clarified that the classification of marble slabs and tiles should be finalised on the basis of test report from GSI, Nagpur and in the event of conflicting reports from Central Revenue Control Laboratory (CRCL) and GSI, Nagpur, reliance should ...
Tag this Judgment!Allahabad Bank Vs. Zoravar Vanaspati Ltd. and ors.
Court: DRAT Delhi
Reported in: II(2003)BC113
1. The appellant-Allahabad Bank filed O.A. 572/97 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the DRT'), Delhi for the recovery of certain amounts from the respondents 1 to 4 herein, who were defendants in the O.A. In response to the O. A., the respondents 1, 2 and 4 are stated to have entered appearance, and opposed the O.A., among other grounds, on the ground that the Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'RIICO') was a necessary party, and without impleading the same, the O.A. was not maintainable. The learned Presiding Officer of the DRT, Delhi took up this preliminary objection alone for consideration, and by his order dated 1.7.1999 held that RIICO is a necessary party. He, therefore, dismissed the O.A. on the ground that RIICO had not been impleaded.2. Aggrieved, the appellant has filed this appeal, which was originally pending before the DRAT, Mumbai, and subsequently, was transferred to t...
Tag this Judgment!Jyoti Prabha Society Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in: (2003)87ITD126(Delhi)
1. This appeal, preferred by the assessee, is directed against order dt. 24th April, 2002, passed by the CIT Haldwani (Uttaranchal), by which application of the assessee, seeking registration under Section 12A(a) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), as a charitable institution, was rejected.2. To begin with, we are giving out the background of the assessee-society. As transpires from the records, German missionaries purchased properties in northern India for educational activities somewhere in 1879 and a society by the name of "United Provinces Institute of the Blessed Virgin Mary" was registered in 1949. By 1972, the said institute was found running the St. Mary's Convent High School; St. Mary's Boarding Department; and Nirmala Balika Vidayalya, a Hindi medium school for poor children at Nainital. Similar activities were also being conducted by the said institute at other places. In the year 1972 itself, the activities of the institute at Nainital were bifurcat...
Tag this Judgment!Sh. Ravi Garg Vs. Smt. Bharti Garg
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2003IIAD(Delhi)281; 103(2003)DLT315; 2003(67)DRJ201
S. Mukerjee, J. 1. On 12.12.2002, I had occasion to spend more than half an hour with the children, during the course of which I found the children to be extremely mature and well aware of their own welfare, as also having a very balanced approach qua their relations with both parents.2. This civil revision petition has been preferred by the father challenging the interim order dated 10.2.2000 of the Guardianship Judge incorporating the following interim arrangement :'The Court is of the considered view, thus that in the instant case, it would not been appropriate to grant exclusive custody of the minors to the respondent-father, but it is considered appropriate for the welfare of the minors that the arrangement which has commenced during the pendency of the civil suit pending between the children and the father before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi i.e. The suit having been failed by the children through their mother i.e. Suit No. 1787 of 99 continues and the petitioner is, thus, per...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Mamta Mohindra, W/O Late Sh. Sunil Mohindra, Vs. the Deputy Commi ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1(2003)ACC359; I(2003)ACC359; 2004ACJ395; 2003IIAD(Delhi)261; 103(2003)DLT203; 2003(67)DRJ120
S.N. Kapoor, J. 1. This judgment shall dispose of two appeals; one filed by the claimants Ms. Mamta Mohindra, widow of Sh. Sunil Mohindra, Master Sahil (son), Miss Shalvi (daughter) and Smt. Kanta Mohindra, mother of the deceased and the other appeal filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (PCR), Police Headquarters, I. P. Estate, New Delhi along with driver, Head Constable Jai Prakash, for the vehicle belonged to the Police Department. 2. Both the parties are aggrieved by the award passed by the learned Tribunal by granting compensation amounting to Rs.8,16,000/-, holding the driver Jai Prakash rash and negligent in driving and thereby causing death of Mr. Sunil Mohindra; taking monthly income of the deceased @ Rs.4800/- per month plus Rs.1200/- towards future prospects, but without appropriately considering the future prospects, deducting one-third out of it and awarding a compensation of Rs.8,16,000/- .3. The claimants- widow, two minor children and mother of the deceased alleged...
Tag this Judgment!Mr. NavIn Kumar and anr. Vs. Standard Restaurant and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2003IIAD(Delhi)289; 2003(1)ARBLR685(Delhi); 103(2003)DLT209; 2003(68)DRJ702; 2003(2)RAJ65
S. Mukerjee, J. 1. is No. 3120/2000 is an application has been filed under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 on the short ground that since there is admittedly an arbitration clause existing between the parties, thereforee according to the defendant/ applicant, this Court has necessarily to refer the matter to arbitration in accordance with the said arbitration agreement as is existing between the parties.2. Reliance has been placed upon Clauses 15 & 16 of the Partnership Deed which reads as under :-'Clause 15: That in the event of any difference or dispute arising between any of the parties herein, such dispute shall first be amicably settled if possible. In case of the disagreement persisting, the decision of the 1st partner (Shri Kamal Nath Monga) shall always prevail. However, if so desired by the party in difference, the dispute may be referred to arbitrator in which case the 1st partner (Shri Kamal Nath Monga) shall have the right to appoint any person as the sole arbitrator...
Tag this Judgment!Heineken Brouwerijen B.V. Vs. Som Distilleries and Breweries Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2003IIAD(Delhi)381; 103(2003)DLT355; 2003(67)DRJ238a; 2003(26)PTC323(Del); 2003(2)RAJ99
R.C. Jain, J. 1. M/s. Heineken Brouwerijen B.V., Netherland, the plaintiff have filed this application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 read with Section 151 CPC praying for interim injunction against the defendant, Som Distilleries & Breweries Ltd. for restraining them, its promoters, directors, shareholders, licensees, franchisees, servants, partners, agents, representatives and distributors etc. severally and jointly from using in any manner whatsoever the infringing label or any other label identical with or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's registered green label colour, getup, layout etc. upon or in relation to its beer products and from passing off its beer products as the beer products of the plaintiff.2. In brief, the relevant facts are that the plaintiff has filed a suit for perpetual injunction and damages to restrain the defendant from infringing the plaintiff's registered green label in relation to its beer products or any label identical with or deceptively similar to t...
Tag this Judgment!Hind Cutlery House Vs. Malik Bartan Bhandar
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2003IIAD(Delhi)266; 103(2003)DLT161; 2003(26)PTC344(Del); [2004]50SCL349(Delhi)
S. Mukerjee, J.1. The Plaintiff is a partnership firm consisting of two partners viz. Shri Pradeep Kumar Rastogi and Shri Pramod Kumar Rastogi trading jointly as M/s. Hind Cutlery House at Amroha Gate, Moradabad (U.P.).2. Since the year 1979, the plaintiff's firm has been carrying on the business of manufacturing and marketing of 'CUTLERY GOODS', using the trade mark 'V.I.P' for their aforesaid products.3. The said trade mark 'V.I.P' is duly registered under No. 398540 in Class 8 dated 7.12.1982, which was renewed in 1989 and the same is stated to be valid and subsisting as on date.4. The certificate issued by Trade Mark Registry is exhibited as Exhibit D.5. The plaintiff has been using cartons for the marketing of their products since the year 1979. The salient features of the Plaintiff's said carton are as under:'The carton is artistic and mainly has a silver colour base. In the centre of the same, 'V.I.P' 'Classic' is printed. Words 'Stainless Steel Table Cutlery' are printed in gol...
Tag this Judgment!Schneider Electric Sa Vs. Telemecanique Controls (i) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 103(2003)DLT491; 2003(67)DRJ773; [2003]44SCL498(Delhi)
J.D. Kapoor, J. 1. The whole controversy for the limited purpose of the instant application revolves around the point 'Whether the plaintiff company (in short 'SESA') is the rightful successor-in-interest of the parent French company known as LTE which had entered into a joint venture with Indian company `CS' and floated the defendant company known as `TC' by investing equity of 38% each.' Plaintiff company SESA is seeking injunction against the defendant-TC from holding the meetings of Board of Directors of the defendant company as at the time of constitution of the defendant-company both LTE and CS were having 38% share each and plaintiff-SESA being the successor-in-interest of LTE is entitled to have one Director on the Board of Directors of the defendant company. 2. The dilemma and difficulty of the defendant-TC is that it is not sure whether the plaintiff company is rightful successor of LTE or not as till 1997 the defendant had no information about the change of name of LTE and i...
Tag this Judgment!