Delhi Court August 2003 Judgments

Mandir Sita Ramji Alias Sita Ram Bhandar Vs. Land Acquistion Collector ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2003VIIIAD(Delhi)359; 108(2003)DLT305; 2003(70)DRJ630

B.C. Patel, C.J.1. The lands sought to be acquired for public purpose in this matter were the subject matter of earlier notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act') which was issued on 13th November, 1959. Thereafter the matter was taken to the Apex Court and a direction was given that after hearing the petitioner under Section 5A of the Act, the appropriate order may be passed.2. However, it appears that considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Government took a decision to issue a fresh notification under Section 4 of the Act which was accordingly issued on 13th March, 1975. The objection came to be filed by the petitioner on 16th August, 1975. At that stage this petition was filed in August, 1977. After considering the objections raised by the petitioner herein, Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 22nd February, 1978. It transpires that thereafter, notice under Section 9 was issued on or ...

Time Warner Entertainment Co. L.P. and ors. Vs. R.P.G. Netcom Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2003(27)PTC452(Del)

O.P. Dwivedi, J.1. This order shall govern the disposal of is No. 5186/2001 filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 10 and Order 7 Rule 11(b)(c) CPC seeking return of the plaint for being presented in the proper Court having territorial jurisdiction.2. The plaintiffs are companies incorporated in USA and carrying on business of film production having copy rights in the films produced by them. They adopt a definite distribution strategy to release the film after completion in different stages. Generally the first stage entails release of the film in theatres and/or cinema halls. It is only after the film has run its course in the theaters and cinema halls that the film is released in other formats such as video, cable and satellite TV. Defendant is alleged to be a cable TV operator providing cable TV services almost all over India through its associates/subsidiary companies, agents, franchises and distributors. It is the case of the plaintiffs that their investigation has revealed a t...

National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Daljeet Singh

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

Rumnita Mittal, Member: 1. This order shall govern the disposal of application dated 25.8.2000 filed by the appellant/applicant along with the above mentioned appeal for condonation of delay in filing the present appeal. The brief facts, relevant for the disposal of the present application are, that the complaint, filed by the respondent Shri Daljeet Singh under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), before the District Forum was decided vide order dated 4.5.2000, whereby the said complaint filed by the respondent was allowed with the directions to the appellant to pay to the respondent a sum of Rs. 63,988/- together with interest @ 12% from the date of reporting the loss i.e. 10.8.1998 till the date of payment, as well as Rs. 2,500/- as cost of litigation. 2. The appellant being aggrieved by the aforesaid order has filed the present appeal along with an application for condonation of delay. On 30.5.2003 it was prayed by the learned Counse...

Haryana Industrial Security Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT242TriDel

1. These appeals are against a common order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in two separate appeals filed by the assessee against two orders of the original authority. By order, dated 19-9-2000, the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise (Service Tax Unit), Faridabad had confirmed a demand of service tax of Rs. 3,18,073/- for the period 16-10-98 to 31-3-99 under Section 68 read with Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. He had also ordered recovery of interest for the belated payment of service tax under Section 75 of the said Act. The Assistant Commissioner also imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,18,073/-on the assessee under Section 78 of the Act, after holding that the latter had deliberately withheld the true value of taxable services from the Department. By a separate order, dated 5-12-2000, the Assistant Commissioner confirmed a demand of service tax of Rs. 3,55,500/- against the assessee for the period 1-4-99 to 30-9-99 and also ordered recovery of interest on delayed payment of ...

Fenner India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT53TriDel

1. Heard both the sides. Keeping in view the fact that Hon'ble Supreme Court set aside the demand, therefore, prima fade, Revenue cannot raise the demand for the same period in view of the amended provisions of Section 110 of Finance Act, 2000. The applicant had a strong case in their favour. Therefore, the pre-deposit of duty and penalty is waived for hearing of Appeal. Adjourned to 20-10-03 for arguments....

Hydraulics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2003)(158)ELT84TriDel

1. This appeal is against an order of the Commissioner (Appeals) denying to the appellants Cenvat credit of Rs. 87,670/- taken on 19-1-2001 on the basis of a supplementary invoice issued on 23-11-2000 by M/s. Hydraulics Ltd., Chennai.2. Examined the records and heard both the sides. It appears from the records and the submissions that the appellants had received various consign- ments of inputs (components of motor vehicle parts viz. Shock Absorbers) under cover of Rule 52A invoices from M/s. Hydraulics Ltd., Chennai over the period January, 1996 to October, 2000 and that they had taken Modvat credit on those goods on the strength of the said invoices. Subsequently, it appears, the Department suspected undervaluation of those goods at the end of the input-supplier and accordingly booked a case against them. In the course of the Departmental proceedings against the input-supplier, the value of the inputs was enhanced and differential duty on that basis was paid by M/s. Hydraulics Ltd.,...

Mahendra Agarwal and ors. Vs. Bank of Rajasthan and ors.

Court: DRAT Delhi

Reported in: III(2004)BC222

1. Respondent-Bank of Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as 'the Respondent Bank') filed O.A. 427/98 against appellants 1 and 2 (defendant 2 and 3, and hereinafter referred to as the 'Appellant/defendants') and respondents 2 to 6 herein (as defendants 1 and 4 to 7 respectively) before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the DRT). The respondent - Bank filed a miscellaneous application under Section 19 (13)(A) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the attachment of the property of the 3rd defendant (2nd appellant herein), bearing No. D-34, Basant Vihar, Gandhi Nagar, Bheelwara. Second appellant/3rd defendant filed a reply opposing this application urging, among other things, that the said property does not belong to her, that the sale letter relied upon by the respondent-Bank is not genuine, and cannot be construed as a sale deed.2. This application along with certain other appl...

Satya Wati and anr. Vs. Raju and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: III(2003)ACC316; 2003VIAD(Delhi)314; 106(2003)DLT570; 2003(71)DRJ29; 2003(3)JCC1525

S.K. Mahajan, J.1. The appellants have filed this appeal for enhancement for compensation for the death of their son on 5.8.1980 in a road accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver. The deceased was 18 years of age at the time of his death and was allegedly earning a sum of Rs.400/- per month. The Tribunal after holding that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus by its driver held that the deceased died because of the injuries sustained in the said accident. The Tribunal relying upon the statement of the employer of the deceased held that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.240/- per month. It was further held that the deceased could not have given the economic support to his parents at more than Rs.100/- per month as he was also pursuing his studies in the evening. It was also held by the Tribunal that as the deceased would have got married and would have looked after his wife and children, he could not...

Sh. J.C. Pant Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2004IAD(Delhi)277; 108(2003)DLT29

Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. Rule. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal. In this writ petition, the petitioner is essentially aggrieved by the order of the Estate Officer dated 07.07.1999 which has been confirmed in Appeal u/s 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by the learned ADJ vide judgment dated 16.03.2002 whereby the petitioner has been ordered to pay a sum of Rs2, 00, 338/- assessed as damages on account of the purported unauthorised occupancy by the petitioner of the premises C-II/10, Moti Bagh-I, New Delhi for the period 01.09.1997 to 26.10.1998.2. The petitioner is a retired Civil Servant and in the course of his employment he was allotted the aforesaid premises. He retired on 31.12.1996 and thereafter his allotment was cancelled w.e.f. 30.04.1997. Further four months extension was granted to the petitioner on medical grounds. However, the petitioner vacated the premis...

Krishan Kumar Sharma and anr. Vs. Shiv Raj Singh and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: I(2004)ACC346; 2005ACJ1085; 2003VIAD(Delhi)319

S.K. Mahajan, J. 1. ADMIT. 2. With the consent of the parties matter has been heard and disposed of by this order. 3. The appellants are the parents of one Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sharma who died on 5.2.1996 in a road accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of the bus by its driver. The appellants filed an application before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal claiming compensation for the death of their son in the said accident. It was alleged in the application that the accident was caused entirely due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus, which collided with a tractor as a result of which the deceased who was standing near the rear gate fell down on the road and was run over by a tractor trolley. The Tribunal in the impugned judgment has held that the deceased at the time of the accident was traveling on the rear foot board of the bus and fell down on the road because of the impact of the collision the bus had with the tractor trolley and was run over by the tractor trolle...