Delhi Court September 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.
Vinita Saxena Vs. Pankaj Pandit
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-12-2003
Reported in: 17(2003)DLT44; II(2003)DMC506
S.K. Mahajan, J. 1. This order will dispose of the application of the appellant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condensation of delay in filing the appeal. A few facts giving rise to this appeal are :The appellant had filed a petition under Section 13(1)(ia)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by a decree of dicorce. That petition was dismissed by the Matrimonial Court vide its judgment dated 19th March, 2001. The judgment of the Matrimonial Court has now been challenged by filing an appeal by the appellant on 5th April, 2002. There is a delay of 355 days in filing the appeal. This application is, thereforee, filed for condensation of this delay.2. The appellant was married to the respondent on 7th February, 1993. Alleging that the marriage was not consummated as the respondent was incapable of consummating the same and alleging cruelty, the appellant filed petition on or about June 30, 1994 seeking dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce. After ...
Smt. Prakashwati and ors. Vs. D.T.C. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-12-2003
Reported in: I(2004)ACC502; 2005ACJ1017; 2003VIIAD(Delhi)524
S.K. Mahajan, J. 1. Since both these appeals arise from the same order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, they are being disposed of by this common order. F.A.O. No. 417/2002 is the appeal filed by the appellants for enhancement of compensation for the death of Mr. Baldev Singh, husband of appellant No. 1 and father of appellants 2 to 5, who died in a road accident alleged to have been caused by the rash and negligent driving of the bus owned by respondent No. 1 and being driven by respondent No. 2. The second appeal is filed by the Delhi Transport Corporation for setting aside the award of the Tribunal. A few facts relevant for deciding tis appeal are :One Mr. Baldev Singh was employed as Head Constable with the Delhi Police; that on the intervening night of 10/11th September, 1999 at about 00.05 a.m. when he was waiting for a bus at Najafgarh road in front of fish market near T point Uttam Nagar and was standing besides a DTC bus parked alongside the road a little ahead of...
Suresh Kumar Sharma Vs. Pramod Kumar Sharma and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-12-2003
Reported in: I(2004)ACC231
S.K. Mahajan, J.CM NO.88/2002 1. This application has been filed for condensation of one day's delay in filing the appeal. For the reasons stated in the application, I am satisfied that delay in filing the appeal was not deliberate and there was sufficient cause for not filing the same in time. I, accordingly, allow the application and condone the delay of one day in filing this appeal. The application stands disposed of.FAO No. 605/2001 2. ADMIT.3. With the consent of the parties, matter has been heard and disposed of by this order. 4. The appellant has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for the injuries sustained by the appellant in a road accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle. 5. The only point argued by learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant had lost his left eye completely which under the Workmen's Compensation Act amounted to 30% loss of earning throughout his life. ...
Bayer Aktiengesellschaft Vs. Rajasthan Petrosynthetics Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-12-2003
Reported in: 2004IAD(Delhi)140; 107(2003)DLT682; 2004(73)DRJ491; 2004(28)PTC317(Del); 2004(1)RAJ164
ORDERPradeep Nandrajog, J.1. The present petition is directed against the order dated 13.7.1994 passed by the Registrar of Trade Marks. By the said order, applying Sub-rule 2 of Rule 53 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Rules, 1959, since there was a delay by the petitioner filing the evidence in support of the opposition within the prescribed period of two months, the Registrar of Trade Marks held that the opposition filed by the petitioner being No. DEL-6148 is deemed to have been abandoned.2. The issue whether the words 'shall' in Sub-rule (2) of Rule 53 is mandatory or directory was a subject matter of consideration by Full Bench of this Court. In the decision : 83(2000)DLT249 ; Hastimal Jain trading as Oswal Industries v. Registrar of Trade Marks and Anr.. The Full Bench held that the word 'shall' in Sub-rule (2) of Rule 53 has to be read as 'directory' and not 'mandatory' and as a result thereof the Registrar would be entitled to exercise his power under Section 101 read with Ru...
Sarda Plywood Industries Ltd. Vs. Tac Construction Materials Ltd. and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-12-2003
Reported in: 107(2003)DLT687; 2003(27)PTC391(Del)
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. Whether the mark 'DURACEM' used as a trade mark in respect of non-metallic building materials included in Class 19 so nearly resembles the words 'DUROPLY, DUROBORD, DUROMAC, DURODERBY and DUROTEAK in respect of goods in Class 19 and particularly the trade mark 'DUROPLY' in respect of laminates, teakply, panes, etc. so as to cause deception or likely to cause confusion within the definition of Section 2(1)(d) read with Sections 11(a) and 12(1) of the Trade and Merchandise Act, 1958 arises for consideration in the present proceedings.2. On 19.4.1984, the respondent filed an application for registration of the trade mark 'DURACEM' which was registered as application No. 420899 in Class 19 in respect of non-metallic building material as proposed to be used. On being advertised, petitioner filed the notice of opposition on 10.9.1990 opposing the registration of the mark, alleging that the same would be contrary to the provisions of Sections 9, 11(a), 18(1) and 18(4) ...
Rakesh Goyal Vs. Asstt Cit
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-12-2003
Reported in: (2004)87TTJ(Del)151
ORDERR.K. Gupta, J.M.These are two appeals, one by assessed and one by department and a cross-objection by assessed for block period 1-4-1988 to 17-3-1999.2. In the cross-objection filed by the assessed, which is in regard to challenging the legality of provisions of section 132(1) while completing assessment under section 158BC of the Act, was not pressed by the counsel of the assessed. thereforee, the cross-objection of the assessed is dismissed.3. Now will late the appeal of the assessed in IT(SS)A No. 109/Del/2002.3.1 The brief facts, as stated in the order of Commissioner (Appeals) in para 3 of his order are as under :'3. Ultimately, in the wake of said search operation, notice under section 158BC dated 4-1-2000 was issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Investigation Circle, Dehradun, hereinafter referred to as Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. In compliance with the said notice the assessed filed a return in the prescribed form on 3-3-2000 before the Dy. CIT. In the re...
Krishan Kumar Aggarwal Vs. Assessing Officer
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-12-2003
Reported in: [2004]266ITR380(Delhi)
D.K. Jain, J.1. This appeal by the assessed under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), is directed against order dated May 14, 2003, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal'), in I. T. A. No. 1001/Delhi of 2002, pertaining to the assessment year 1998-99.2. Briefly stated, the material facts, giving rise to the appeal, are as follows :During the course of assessment proceedings for the aforenoted assessment year, the Assessing Officer noticed that in the assessed's books of account a sum of Rs. 1 lakh was reflected as loan from one Mr. Vipin Kumar Alagh. The Assessing Officer required the assessed to furnish evidence to prove the genuineness of the said loan. Pursuant thereto, a copy of the bank account of the said Vipin Kumar, from where the cheque in favor of the assessed had been drawn, was filed. Upon recording the statement of the said creditor, the Assessing Officer came to the conclusion that the said Alagh had fa...
Arvind Chemi Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2003
Reported in: (2004)(163)ELT121TriDel
1. This is an application filed by M/s. Arvind Chemi Synthetics Pvt.Ltd. for waiver of pre-deposit of Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 4,90,245/- 2. Shri V.N. Verma, ld. Advocate, submitted that the applicants manufactures HDPE Strips of width not extending 5 mm, which were classified by them under Heading 54.08 and the fabrics woven out of this structure was classified under 63.01 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act; that the Central Board of Excise and Customs, vide Order No. 8/92, dated 24-9-92 changed the classification of both the products to sub-headings 3920.32 and 3926.90 of the Tariff; that on the basis of Circular the demand has been raised for the period 24-9-92 to 6-12-92; that the changes in the classification brought about by the Order No. 8/92 was never communicated to the Trade, which did not come to know about such changes up to December, 1992; that it has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of H.D. Bags Manufacturer v. CCE, 1997 (94) E.L.T. 3 ...
Dimensions India Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2003
Reported in: (2003)(90)ECC600
1. The complaint of the appellant is that Commissioner of Customs has acted beyond the scope of the order of remand passed by the Tribunal's Final Order No. 147/2001-A, dated 26-3-2001 [2001 (138) E.L.T. 800 (Tribunal)].2. The appellant is an exporter of cotton shirts in respect of Shipping Bill, dt. 3-8-99 relating to 100% cotton gents shirts. Dispute arose regarding the valuation. While the appellant declared value at the rate of 10.75 US dollars (Rs. 463.83) per piece. The Commissioner of Customs fixed the same at Rs. 50/- on the basis of market enquiry. The appellant challenged the order before this Tribunal which resulted in Final Order No. 147/2001-A.3. The appellant contended that their declared value is in accordance with the purchase order of the customer abroad. They further submitted that the details of the market enquiry which was relied on by the Commissioner was not made available to them and that no opportunity was granted to them to cross-examine those persons from who...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Denso India Limited
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2003
Reported in: (2004)(165)ELT232TriDel
1. In this appeal which has been filed by the Revenue against the impugned Order-in-Appeal, the issue relates to availability of the Modvat credit on the plastic crates used as packing material by the respondents. The Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the Modvat credit after reversing the Order-in-Original of the adjudicating authority who has confirmed the duty demand, by following the ratio of law laid down in CCE v.Paras Pharmaceutical (P) Ltd.G. Claridge & Co. v. CCE, 1991 (52) E.L.T. 341 (S.C.) wherein it has been consistently ruled that the Modvat credit is available on the packing material if the cost is included in the value of the final products. In the instant case, the cost of the plastic crates which had been used by the appellants as packing material for safe transportation of final products i.e. auto electical parts, from place of manufacturer to the place of customers and brought back to the factory for reuse, has been included in the value of the final products. T...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »