Delhi Court April 2003 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.
Plasopan Engineers (India) Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: (2003)LC104Tri(Delhi)
1. The issue involved in these appeals, filed by M/s. Plasopan Engineers (India) Pvt. Ltd., is whether the impugned products manufactured by them are classifiable under sub-heading No. 3925.99 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act; as confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals), under the impugned order or under sub-heading No. 3925.20 as claimed by them.2. Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, learned Advocate, mentioned that the Appellants manufacture (a) PVC roof, ceiling, etc. and (b) PVC doors and windows, in unassembled condition; that at site the roof, ceiling, doors and windows are assembled by simple assembly operations; that the parts are specifically designed and extruded for assembly of each of the products at site; that such parts are hollow PVC profiles; that while the un-assembled hollow profiles extruded for roof, ceiling, etc.are load/pressure bearing, the un-assembled hollow profile of doors and windows are not load/pressure bearing; that the PVC hollow profiles are not pro...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Hvr Alloys and Steel Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: (2003)(157)ELT638TriDel
1. Revenue filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. Brief facts of the case are that the present respondents are engaged in the manufacture of M.S. flats/bars. To manufacture M.S. flats and bars, respondents were purchasing billets from various manufacturers.Allegation against the respondents is that one manufacturer, M/s. Nova Udyog Ltd., cleared certain billets without payment of duty to various dealers and respondents purchased those billets and out of these billets manufactured M.S. flats and cleared the same without payment of duty. Revenue is relying upon the evidence by way of GRs recovered from various transporters which show the name of the present respondents as consignee.4. The contention of the revenue is that GRs recovered from various transporters show that the billets were delivered to the present respondents and the present respondents have entered these in their statutory records for manufacture of their final product and n...
Madan Stores (P.) Ltd. Vs. Central Bank of India and ors.
Court: DRAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: III(2003)BC134
1. Central Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as "the respondent-Bank") has filed O.A. 62/2002 for the recovery of money from appellant-Madan Stores (hereinafter referred to as "the appellant-defendant") and others. The said O.A. is pending before the DRT-III Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as "the DRT").2. Appellant-defendant filed LA. 249/2002 before the DRT with a prayer to adjourn the proceedings awaiting the orders/award of the Arbitral Tribunal in the matter of arbitration between appellant-defendant and Indian Petrochemicals Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "IPCL").This request of the appellant-defendant was declined by the learned Presiding Officer of the DRT observing that if some arbitration proceeding is pending between the appellant-defendant and IPCL relating to some contract, that has nothing to do with this O.A., and, therefore, the adjournment cannot be granted.3. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant-defendant has preferred this appeal. The respondent-Bank, who...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Sh. Harpal Singh, Ex. Security Guard a ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: 2003IVAD(Delhi)429; 105(2003)DLT113; 2003(69)DRJ537; 2004(1)SLJ66(Delhi)
Mukul Mudgal , J. 1. The respondent No. 1/wokrman was appointed as a Security Guard on 12th November, 1982. It is not in dispute that in June, 1991, the respondent No. 1 met with an accident while in service and suffered disability. He was retired from service on 22nd February, 1994. The Labour Court by its impugned Order reinstating the respondent No. 1 has noticed the provisions of Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995(hereinafter referred to as `the Act') and referred to and applied the judgment of a Learned Single Judge of this Court in Baljeet Singh Vs DTC : 83(2000)DLT286 .2. Section 47 of the Act reads as under:'47.Non-discrimination in Government employments._ (1) No establishment shall dispense with, or reduce in rank, an employee who acquires a disability during his service: Provided that, if an employee, after acquiring disability is not suitable for the post he was holding, could be shifted t...
Hari Ram Vs. Lala Om Prakash
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: 2003IVAD(Delhi)124; 104(2003)DLT861; 2003(68)DRJ510
J.D. Kapoor, J. 1. Parties are real brothers. Plaintiff has through this suit sought partition of their father's property No. 1775, Kucha Lattu Shah, Dariba Kalan, Chandani Chowk, Delhi. Case of the plaintiff in brief is that the plaintiff after the death of his father who was absolute owner of the suit property, became the owner of the one half share along with the defendant who has also one-half share in undivided property. Admittedly portion shown in mark yellow is in occupation of the defendant whereas the portion shown in green is in occupation of the plaintiff. Portion marked red is in common possession. According to the plaintiff the portion in his occupation does not comprise one-half of the area in the said undivided property and since both of them are real brothers, he has requested the defendant to partition the said property by metes and bounds according to their respective shares but the defendant has not bothered to give heed to his requests. Rather the defendant is tryin...
Kaushal Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: 2003(68)DRJ80
R.C. Chopra, J. 1. According to the prosecution the deceased was taken from his house by the co-accused Vicky and Prem Raj and as such the evidence of last seen together is against them only. The petitioner was arrested after the recovery of the dead body. thereforee, the disclosure statement made by him in regard to the place where murder was committed or the place from where the scooter of the deceased was recovered does not appear to be legally admissible evidence for the reason that the facts allegedly disclosed by the petitioner were already in the knowledge of the police. The petitioner is in custody for the last about one year. 2. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegations the application for ball is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail upon his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the condition that during t...
Shri M.R. Bhatia Vs. the Director of Education and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: 2003IVAD(Delhi)570
Mukundakam Sharma, J. 1.The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was filed by the petitioner praying for the following reliefs:a)Call for the records of the case; b)issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to treat the petitioner as promoted on the post of P.G.T. (English) on regular basis with effect from 19.10.1972, in terms of letter dated 7.6.1983 of respondent No. 1 (ANNEXURE-VIII) and pay all arrears of salary and other consequential benefits; c)issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction directing the respondents Nos. 1 to absorb petitioner under Rule 47 of 1973 Rules as P.G.T. (English) in any of the schools within his jurisdiction with effect from 7.10.1973, when the post of P.G.T. (English) which he was holding in Respondent school, became surplus, and pay him all arrears of salary and other consequential benefits; d)in the alternative, issue a writ of mandamus,...
The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. New Delhi Municipal Co ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: 2003IVAD(Delhi)463; AIR2003Delhi295; 104(2003)DLT808; 2003(68)DRJ539
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The age-old saying that fools build houses and wise men live in them has been taken to heart by the respondent Council compelling a number of petitioners to approach this Court for redressal of the grievances.2. The petitioners before this Court are owners of properties located in the jurisdiction of New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) and are governed by the provisions of The New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994 (hereinafter to be referred as, 'the said Act'). There are both residential and commercial properties.3. In order to appreciate the contours of the disputes, which have arisen in these various petitions, it was found appropriate to hear the Counsels representing different parties on all the aspects and to pronounce a common order in the present writ petition dealing with these aspects. Thereafter individual directions can be passed in each of the writ petition including any further directions as may be required in the particular facts and circumstances...
Smt Shobha and Shri Kailash Chand and anr. Vs. Govt. Nct of Delhi and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: 2004ACJ1479; 2003IVAD(Delhi)492; AIR2003Delhi399; 105(2003)DLT449; 2003(69)DRJ188
A.K. Sikri, J.1. The opening remarks of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others versus Smt. Santra reported in 2000 (3) Sup 520 ably apply to the fact-situation prevailing in these two writ petitions. This is what the Supreme Court observed in the beginning of the aforesaid judgment:-' Medical Negligence plays its game in strange ways. Sometimes it plays with life; sometimes it gifts an 'Unwanted Child' as in the instant case where the respondent a poor labourer woman, who already had many children and had opted for sterilization, developed pregnancy and ultimately gave birth to a female child in spite of sterilisation operation which, obviously, had failed.' CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7715 OF 20012. Civil writ petition no. 7715/2001 was heard and judgment reserved. Before this judgment could be pronounced writ petition no. 7515 of 2000 came up for hearing on 18th March, 2003. During the arguments it was noticed that the issue involved in this case was identical to th...
Pranay Kumar Soni Vs. the Chairman, U.P.S.C. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2003
Reported in: 2003(69)DRJ278
C.K. Mahajan, J.1. The petitioner seeks re-assessment/re-evaluation of the answer-sheet of the petitioner in second paper of Commerce and Accountancy (Civil Services Main Examination) 2001.2. The petitioner passed the preliminary Civil Services Examination on 20th May, 2001. He appeared in the main examination on 24th August, 2001. The petitioner was declared successful in the written examination and was called for interview on 9th April, 2002. The petitioner was interviewed but he was not selected. The total marks obtained by him were communicated to him after declaring the final result. The petitioner was awarded 75 marks in the optional one Commerce and Accountancy Paper (Code-II). The petitioner made a representation to the Union Public Service Commission hereinafter called UPSC with a request that second paper of first optional (Commerce and Accountancy) be re-checked/re-evaluated. The respondent/UPSC considered the representation and confirmed that there was no error in the marks...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »