Delhi Court April 2003 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
Jagannath Chauhan Vs. S.C. Nanda and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2003
Reported in: 2003VAD(Delhi)514; AIR2003Delhi394; 105(2003)DLT132; 2003(69)DRJ316
Khan, J.1. Admit. Notice accepted by Mr. Vikas Dhawan for respondent. This appeal is also taken up for disposal in view of the disposal of two other connected appeals between the parties on the subject matter. It is directed against impugned order dated 4.3.2003 doing away with appellant's (defendant) evidence and directing the posting of R-1's suit for final disposal on the pleadings of the parties.2. Contesting parties are Advocates and are involved in a do or die fight over a flat at Patpar Ganj belonging to R-1. Both seem to have been working together at one stage but having fallen out later. Both have their own story to tell over-stretching the process of this court in the process. Appellant claims that he was working on the revenue side and had conducted some investigation and done some drafting for R-1 for which he was entitled to a fee of Rs. 15,26,900/- till December 1996 by him. In lieu thereof, R-1 made an oral agreement to sell the flat to him for Rs. 6 lacs. He handed over...
D.N. Sood and anr. Vs. Inspecting Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2003
Reported in: 105(2003)DLT33; 2003(69)DRJ366; 2003(2)JCC1151
ORDERB.N. Chaturvedi, J.Crl. MM. No. 1756/2003 :1. By an order dated 10.4.2003 proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. were directed to be initiated against the petitioners and notices under Section 446, Cr.P.C. were directed to be issued to their respective sureties. That order is being assailed on behalf of the petitioner by way the present petition. It is noticed that the petitioners have not been appearing before the learned Trial Court for a period of about three years and consequently in order to secure their presence, processes under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. were directed to be issued against them.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that it was on account of fault on the part of their Counsel to inform the petitioners to appear in person that they could not appear before the learned Trial Court. It is pointed out that earlier the petitioners were exempted from personal attendance and were appearing through their Counsel. The Counsel representing them howev...
NagIn Chand Godha Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2003
Reported in: 2003(70)DRJ721
B.C. Patel, C.J.1. Petitioner has approached this Court by filing this petition, inter alia, praying that by issuance of appropriate writ, the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') bearing No. F. 15(III)/59/LSG and notification under Section 6 of the Act dated 12.11.1968 bearing No. F. 4(98)/65-L&H; be quashed and set aside and the respondent be directed to denotify the land in question. 2. After the issuance of the notifications, as aforesaid, award has been made which was challenged before this Court by filing civil writ petition No. 1589/86. This petition was dismissed. It may be noted that the petitioner had no right or title to file the petition, as the land at the relevant time stood in the name of his father and the petition was also filed by his father. The contention raised before the Court is that the application under Section 48(1) of the Act is made to the Lt. Governor for denotifyingthe land in question. On no...
D.N. Sood Vs. Ito
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2003
Reported in: [2003]131TAXMAN304(Delhi)
ORDERBy an order dated 10-4-2003 proceedings under sections 82 and 83 of Cr. P.C. were directed to be initiated against the petitioners and notices under section 446 Cr. P.C. were directed to be issued to their respective sureties. That order is being assailed on behalf of the petitioner by way the present petition. It is noticed that the petitioners have not been appearing before the learned trial court for a period of about three years and consequently in order to secure their presence, processes under sections 82 and 83 of Cr. P.C. were directed to be issued against them.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it was on account of fault on the part of their counsel to inform the petitioners to appear in person that they could not appear before the learned trial court. It is pointed out that earlier the petitioners were exempted from personal attendance and were appearing through their counsel. The counsel representing them however omitted to inform them of the order that...
Capstan Meters (India) Limited Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-2003
Reported in: (2003)(88)ECC59
1. The issue involved in these three appeals, filed by M/s. Capstan Meters (India) Ltd., is whether the benefit of Notification No.175/86-CE, dated 1.3.1986 is available in respect of the goods manufactured by them.2.1 Shri K.K. Anand, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants manufacture water meters and parts thereof and dirt boxes; that they were licensed under the Industries (Development & Regulation) Act 1951; that they were also not registered as a SSI unit with the Director of Industries of State; that, however, they were availing the benefit of Notification No. 77/85-CE prior to 1.3.86; that from 1.3.86 to 30,10.87, they availed of the exemption under Notification No.175/86-CE; that after amendment of Notification No, 175/86-CE by Notification No. 244/87-CE dated 30.10.1987, they were asked to pay demand of duty short paid during the period from 30.10.87 to 31.3.88 as the units registered under the IDR Act with the Directorate General of Technical Development were no...
V and R Auto Gauges (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-2003
Reported in: (2003)(160)ELT828TriDel
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the impugned order-in-original dated 25-9-2002 vide which the Commissioner as the adjudicating authority had confirmed the demand of Rs. 47,31,486/- with equal amount of penalty, for the period November, 1995 to February, 1999 against the appellants by classifying their product under Chapter Heading 87.14 of the CETA, after invoking the extended period of limitation.2. The facts are not much in dispute. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of speedometers which are fitted in various types of scooters/motor cycles. Some of the speedometers manufactured by them had features like beam-light and pilot turn indicator. These speedometers are being manufactured by them for 4 types of two-wheelers, i.e. Bajaj Super FE type speedometer for scooters, Enfield Motorcycles, Bajaj M-80 (motorcycle speedometer) and Bajaj Super Scooter. They had been classifying the speedometers under Chapter Heading 90.29 of CETA. Their classification ...
J.R. Alloys Castings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-2003
Reported in: (2003)(160)ELT451TriDel
1. During the material period, the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of non-alloy steel ingots (CET sub-heading 7206.90) and were operating under the Compounded Levy Scheme of Rule 96ZO of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. Their induction furnace happened to be closed down during various spells between April, 1998 and March, 1999. For such spells of non-operation, they applied to the Commissioner for abatement of duty under Sub-rule (2) of Rule 96ZO. A substantial part of this claim was allowed by the Commissioner. It appears from the record that abatement of duty was not allowed for the 16th and 17th of May, 1998 and for 15th and 16th of August, 1998 on the ground that intimation of closure of the furnace was not given in due time in terms of Clause (a) of Rule 96ZO(2).2. Heard both sides. Ld. Counsel for the appellants submits that the furnace was closed around 10.00 P.M. on 15-5-98 and intimation thereof was given to the jurisdictional Range Officer of Central Exci...
Bhartiya Plastic Udyog and anr. Vs. Central Warehousing Corpn. and ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-2003
Reported in: 105(2003)DLT59; 2003(69)DRJ399; 2003(89)ECC66; 2003(157)ELT16(Del)
S.K. Mahajan, J. 1. The short point involved in the writ petition is whether the respondent-Corporation could refuse to deliver the second consignment because of non-payment of warehousing charges in respect of the first consignment and even assuming the respondent had a right to refuse delivery of the second consignment because of non-payment of warehousing charges of the first consignment; is the Corporation entitled to claim warehousing charges in respect of the second consignment though it was warehoused or stored in the Godown of the warehouse keeper without the consent of the petitioner? A few facts relevant for deciding the writ petition are : The petitioner imported acrylic scrap vide the Bill of Entry No. 105167 dated 29.10.1992 (in short referred to as the First Consignment). The goods were contained in three containers. The declared value of the goods was US $ 240 PMT, however, when they reached India, the customs authority assessed the price of the goods at US $ 475 PMT. No...
Govt. of Nct of Delhi Vs. Shri Khem Chand and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Delhi314; 2003(2)ARBLR164(Delhi); 104(2003)DLT857; 2003(68)DRJ518
B.N. Chaturvedi, J.1. Respondent-claimant was awarded the work of extension of Ranhola Bridge at RD-30825 M Supplementary Drain in Delhi by the objector-petitioner. The designs and drawing for the bridge were supplied to the respondent-claimant by the petitioner-objector. The claimant completed the work in September, 1993 according to the designs and drawings so supplied by the petitioner-objector. Thereafter, the bridge was opened to traffic. Soon after its completion, the bridge structure showed signs of distress leading to collapse of one of its end spans. Middle span also showed signs of distress. The failure of the structure, according to the petitioner-objector, was attributable to poor workmanship and use of substandard material by the claimant. The claimant, on the other hand, maintained that the structure had failed on account of inadequate and defective designs and drawings supplied by the petitioner-objector.2. On matter being referred to sole arbitration of one Shri G.G. Sh...
Kaka's Restaurant Vs. Sh. K.L. Sehgal, Regional Provident Fund Commisi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-29-2003
Reported in: 105(2003)DLT85; 2003(68)DRJ534; (2003)IIILLJ436Del; 2004(1)SLJ88(Delhi)
Mukundakam Sharma, J. 1.This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Delhi on 18.5.1983 under Section 7-A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. By the aforesaid order the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner had held that both the units, namely, Kaka Da Hotel and Kaka Restaurant constitute one establishment. In the present petition the petitioner has prayed for setting aside and quashing the aforesaid impugned order.2.The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner in the aforesaid impugned order has recorded various contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner as also on behalf of the Department. After appreciating the evidence on record, it was held by him that the nature of business of both the Kaka Da Hotel and Kaka Restaurant is common and both belong to one family and that the business of Kaka Restaurant was, in fact, expansion of business of Kaka Da Hotel. The Regional Provide...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »