Delhi Court July 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.
Mr. Ashok Kumar Vs. P.O. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2003
Reported in: 2003VIAD(Delhi)85; 109(2004)DLT548
Mukul Mudgal, J. 1. This writ petition challenges Order dated 3. 9. 2001 passed by Industrial Tribunal by which the application filed by the petitioner-workman seeking amendment to Statement of Claim was disallowed. 2. The history of this case deserves to be noticed. On 20. 5. 1995, Industrial Tribunal had found flawed a domestic enquiry held by the respondent no. 2 on the ground that the enquiry was not conducted validly and legally and was not in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The main grievance of the petitioner was that he was not served with the notice of the enquiry proceedings and he was not informed about the pendency thereof and hence he was disabled to take part in the disciplinary proceedings. This plea was earlier noticed and decided by a Division Bench of this Court in CW 4109 of 1995 on 23rd September, 1997 in a writ petition filed by the respondent No. 2/Management while recording the following finding:-'In the above said facts and circumstances and k...
Raj Bala Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2003
Reported in: 109(2004)DLT300; 2004(74)DRJ443
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that she has not be considered for the grant of a Retail Outlet of the Indian Oil Corporation for which she had applied pursuant to an advertisement which appeared in the newspapers on 8.6.2001. The petitioner claims to be an outstanding sport person having allegedly won the gold medal in javelin and discus throw in the Shung Hung Kai International Track & Field Meet at Hongkong in 1990.2. The aforesaid advertisement dated 8.6.2001 indicated that the Indian Oil Corporation proposed to appoint retail outlets/SKO/LDO Dealers at locations in the State of Haryana and Delhi, inter alia, out of the 'outstanding sports persons' category. It was specified in the advertisement that the outstanding sports person category included:-' (a) Arjuna Awardees (b) Winners of Medals of Olympic/Asian/Commonwealth Games and Recognised World Championships/World Championships and (c) National Championships under the Recognised National Champion...
S. Sucha Singh Anand and anr. Vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-22-2003
Reported in: 2004IAD(Delhi)150; 108(2003)DLT370
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. The petitioner seeks the cancellation and/or quashing of the termination letter dated 26.12.1996 whereby the petrol pump which was being run by the firm M/s S.K.S. Gurmukh Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the Firm') has been terminated. The petitioner no.1 was one of the partners in the said firm. The partnership was entered into sometime in 1963 by the petitioner no.1 and his brother, Gurmukh Singh (respondent no.2). Originally, the petrol pump license was granted by the respondent no.1 to the petitioners' grand father, i.e., Late Sardar Kant Singh who died in 1953. Subsequently, by an agreement dated 11.11.1974, the license was granted by the respondent no.1 to the said firm w.e.f. 01.01.1970. Clause 10 (s) of the said agreement reads as under:-'10. THE LICENSEES HEREBY COVENANT AND AGREE WITH THE COMPANY AS FOLLOWS:-...............................................................................................xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx(s) Not to change ...
Puromatic Filters (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-21-2003
Reported in: (2003)LC352Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Puromatic Filters Pvt. Ltd. have filed this appeal against the Order-in-Original No. 103/93, dated 4-10-93 by which the Commissioner has disallowed the Modvat credit under Rule 57-1 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.2. Shri K.K. Anand, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants initially were manufacturing Purifying Systems as a partnership concern which has been converted into a Private Limited company on 11-5-92; that all the partners became the directors of the appellant-company; that the name, manufacturing activities and location, however, remained the same; that under their letter dated 11-5-92 itself they requested the Director of Industries for amendment of their SSI registration certificate; that the Commissioner under the impugned Order has denied them the benefit of Notification No. 175/86 and confirmed the demand of duty besides disallowing the Modvat credit. The learned Advocate, further, submitted that it has been held by the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. M...
Tide Water Oil Co. (India) Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-21-2003
Reported in: (2003)(156)ELT861TriDel
1. This appeal has been directed by the appellants against the impugned order-in-appeal vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) had affirmed the order-in-original denying their refund claim by way of re-credit of the Modvat credit.2. The appellants availed credit of Rs. 1,21,776.06 on the strength of the invoices issued by the supplier. M/s. Tide Water Oil Co., Bombay.But the said credit was reversed as the documents were not issued, from any registered premises. This reversal was, however, made by the appellants under protest. Thereafter, they lodged the claim for refund on the ground that the documents issued were proper, The adjudicating authority disallowed the refund on the ground that the documents issued for denying Modvat credit were not proper as the godown from where the goods were cleared by the supplier named above, was not included in their registration certificate. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has affirmed his findings.3. The learned Counsel has contended that the go...
Special Prints Limited Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-21-2003
Reported in: (2003)LC972Tri(Delhi)
1. These appeals are against the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Surat in adjudication of a show cause notice issued by him on 12.5.1998 on the basis of the results of the departmental investigation into certain clearances of excisable goods by two of the appellants viz. M/s. Special Prints Ltd and M/s Garden Silk Mills Ltd. The bare facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of these appeals are as under: During the period April 1993 to March, 1998, M/s Special Prints Ltd Surat, on jobwork basis, processed grey man-made fabrics supplied by M/s Garden Silk Mills Ltd, Surat and cleared the processed fabrics to M/s Garden Silk Mills Ltd on payment of Central Excise duty. The show cause notice alleged that the two companies were related persons in terms of Section 4(4)(c) of the Central Excise act and, therefore, M/s Special Prints Ltd should have paid duty on the processed fabrics in terms of the wholesale price at which the goods were sold by M/s Garden ...
Craft Studio Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-21-2003
Reported in: (2004)(163)ELT109TriDel
1. Appellant M/s. Craft Studio, Jaipur cleared a consignment of toys through 1CD, Jaipur under Bill of Entry dated 23-1-1998. The consignment was assessed to customs duty on the declared value of over Rs. 4 lakhs. The appellant had produced invoice No. NI/890/97, dated 11-12-97 in support of the declared value. Subsequently, enquiries made by the Customs Authorities with the Hong Kong Customs Department through Consulate General of India, Hong Kong revealed that the value mentioned in the invoice and declared by the appellant to the Customs Authorities for the import of goods was a gross underdeclaration. The Customs Authorities at Hong Kong reported that there was a double invoicing arrangement between the appellant and his Hong Kong supplier.As a result, the price mentioned in the invoice represented only a part of the consideration for the goods under import and the exporter received the remaining amount through an open account credited by telegraphic transfer by the appellant. Bas...
Jaiswal Engg. Works (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-21-2003
Reported in: (2003)(159)ELT928TriDel
1. Appellants filed this appeal against the adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, whereby the benefit of Modvat credit was denied to M/s. Telco Ltd., Pimpri.2. Ld. DR, appearing on behalf of the revenue, raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the appeal by the present appellants, i.e., M/s. Jaiswal Engg. Works (P) Ltd. 3. The contention of the revenue is that the present appellants are not aggrieved persons against the impugned order, as neither any demand nor any penalty was imposed on the appellants. Appellants were also not a party before the adjudicating authority.4. Ld. Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellants, submitted that the inputs were supplied by the appellants to M/s. Telco Ltd. and the revenue denied the benefit of Modvat credit to M/s. Telco in respect of above mentioned inputs. M/s. Telco Ltd. stopped payment to the appellants regarding inputs, therefore, the appellants are aggrieved persons, as defined under Sectio...
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and anr. Vs. Ram Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-21-2003
Reported in: III(2003)ACC21; 105(2003)DLT965; 2003(70)DRJ215; (2003)135PLR28; 2004(1)SLJ183(Delhi)
S.K. Mahajan, J. 1. ADMIT. 2. The respondent No.1 was employed with the petitioner-Society. During the course of his employment, he appears to have suffered injuries and an application was, accordingly, filed before the Commissioner under the Workmens' Compensation Act for compensation for the injuries sustained by him during the course of such employment. The application was allowed and the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs.42,360/- as compensation to respondent No.1 along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of accident till realisation. The award of compensation by the Commissioner under the Workmens' Compensation Act has now been challenged by filing this petition. 3. The only contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that since in respect of the service matters concerning the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan only the Central Administrative Tribunal had the jurisdiction, Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act could not entertain the application of re...
Mr. Amar Nath Vs. Director of Education, Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-21-2003
Reported in: 2003VIAD(Delhi)38; 106(2003)DLT197; 2003(71)DRJ673
Mukul Mudgal, J.1. Rule. With the consent of all counsel, the writ petition is taken up today for final hearing. 2. The question involved in the present writ petition is whether the existence of a remedy under Section 8 of the Delhi Schools Education Act, 1973(hereinafter referred to as `the Act') bars an approach to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition filed by the petitioner sought the quashing of a notice dated 7th January, 2003 issued purportedly under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act seeking to retrench the petitioner's services. The petitioner's main plea is that the impugned notice has been passed without prior approval of respondent No. 1, Director of Education, NCT of Delhi as required by Section 8(2) of Act. This Court issued notices in the writ petition and passed an Order dated 6th February, 2003, restraining the termination of the services of the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent has cited the judgment of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »