Delhi Court December 2004 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.
itc Limited Vs. Mr. Pradeep Anand and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARBLR187(Delhi); 116(2005)DLT450; 2005(80)DRJ173
Vikramajit Sen, J.1.This is an application filed on behalf of the Petitioner for amendment of the Objections to the Award dated 24.4.1998. Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been invoked. In brief, the case of the Petitioner/Applicant is that it had been led to understand that Shri C.L. Anand had died intestate and that his son, Shri Pradeep Anand, should, thereforee, be imp leaded in place of his deceased father. In the interim Award dated 20.3.1997 the learned Arbitrator had recorded that -''The Applicant Shri Pradeep Anand claims to be the son and legal heir of Shri C.L. Anand (deceased). He and members of the family of the late Shri C.L. Anand would like to continue and to proceed with this arbitration proceedings; hence this application''.2. In the present application it has been stated that -''Respondent No.1 dishonestly suppressed the fact that Shri C.L. Anand had died leaving a Will, in which his wife Mrs. Shiela Anand was named as the sole heir. This fact has ...
S. Balbir Inder Singh Vs. M.C.D. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(80)DRJ97
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. Writ petition and the CM(Main) above have been filed by S. Balbir Inder Singh. In the writ petition, order dated 18.12.2003 passed by the Appellate Tribunal MCD in Appeal No. 3/ATMCD/2003 has been challenged. It is prayed that said order be sent aside and as a consequence demolition order dated 30.12.2002 passed by MCD be quashed.2. In the CM(Main) it is prayed that order dated 19.4.2004 passed by Shri A.K. Pathak A.D.J. Delhi in MCA No. 49/2004 be quashed and as a consequence order dated 28.2.2004 passed by Sh. Amit Bansal, Civil Judge Delhi in Suit No. 322/2003 be set aside and petitioners application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC be allowed. MCD be restrained from demolishing petitioners house No. 1513, Wazir Nagar, Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi till disposal of the suit filed by the petitioner.3. Case pleaded by the petitioner is that by and under a registered sale deed dated 29.10.1952, his father, late S. Dalip Singh purchased 500 sq. yards of land which c...
Mrs. Vimal Marwah Vs. D.D.A.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2004
Reported in: 117(2005)DLT373
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. Desire to have a self owned roof over her head led petitioner to get herself registered, on 26.7.1982, vide registration No. 1216, under the Vth Self Financing Scheme of the DDA in Category III. As per the scheme, as and when DDA decided to construct flats, registrants could apply for inclusion of their name in a draw and if successful were to be allotted a flat. On payment of the amount demanded, in Installments, possession of the flat was to be handed over by DDA.2. Till 1991, petitioner could not get a flat. What to do! Applications were one to many.3. In the year 1991, DDA decided to allot a few flats constructed in South Delhi to retired and retiring public servants who had got themselves registered under the self financing scheme. Petitioner applied under said scheme called RPS,1991 by submitting an application on 9.9.1991.4. Petitioner was employed under the M.C.D. as a Principal. She had sought voluntary retirement in the year 1987. Her request was acced...
J.K. Saxena Vs. Government of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2004
Reported in: 117(2005)DLT451; 2006(1)SLJ178(Delhi)
Manmohan Sarin, J.1. Rule.2. The matter had been adjourned on 3.11.2004 to enable the respondent to seek instructions, if the reimbursement could be made to the petitioner of the balance amount of Rs. 36,000/-. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent. The plea taken in the counter affidavit to deny the payment is that respondent has reimbursed the package amount payable under the policy of Rs. 1,04,900/-, which was due in terms of Office Memorandum dated 9.9.1999. It is averred that reimbursement has been made of Rs. 1,04,900/- inclusive of the package of Rs. 99,000/- and the balance amount of Rs. 36,000/-, petitioner was not found entitled to by the Competent Authority, being a retired employee.3. The facts are not in dispute. Petitioner, in November, 1999 had felt chest pain and was given treatment at the Clinical Research Centre V.P. Chest Institute. Thereafter, he had cardiac attack on 6.1.2000 and was admitted in emergency of St. Stephen Hospital and given treatment. Pe...
Smt. Basanti Devi and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2004
Reported in: 117(2005)DLT742; 2005(80)DRJ26
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. At the hearing held on 23.11.2004, Ms. Anjana Gosain pressed the petition only on behalf of the first petitioner.2. By way of the present petition, petitioners pray that directions be issued to the respondents to restore land from where the petitioners were dispossessed during emergency and petitioners be compensated for loss suffered due to demolition of their houses. Alternative prayer made is that petitioners be allotted land in a new area.3. In para 2 of the writ petition, petitioners' claim parity with claim made by writ petitioners of WP(C) No. 135/1980 Madan Lal Sharma and Ors. v. UOI and Ors.4. Case of the petitioners is that they purchased a plot of land in a colony called Pandav Nagar, Block-L. Petitioner No. 1 is stated to have purchased land vide sale deed dated 19.11.1971. Petitioners No. 2 and 3 claimed to have purchased a plot each vide sale deed dated 17.2.1972. As per the petitioners, they constructed a house on the plot purchased by him. On 1.1...
Shri Gopal Krishna Khanna and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2004
Reported in: 118(2005)DLT148
B.C. Patel, C.J.1. In this appeal preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') the appellant is aggrieved by the decision of the learned Additional District Judge dated 31.1.1983 passed in LAC No. 441/71. The appellant is aggrieved essentially by the finding recorded in respect of issue Nos. 3, 3A and 3B which pertain to the valuation placed on the building and structure, fittings and fixures, loss of earnings/profits, change of place of business and incidental damages and expenses. The appellant claimed compensation of Rs. 2,05,000/- for building and structure, Rs. 87,000/- for fittings and fixtures, Rs. 2,16,000/- for loss of earnings or profits, Rs. 50,000/- for change of place of business and Rs. 20,000/- towards incidental damages and expenses on account of acquisition. 2. In so far as building and structure is concerned, the evidence produced by the appellant in a form in the estimate required by PW.2 Shri Om Prakash Goel on the basis of C.P....
Cce, Jalandhar Vs. Kf Beltings Pvt. Ltd. [Alongwith
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2004
Reported in: (2005)(98)ECC730
1. These appeals raise a common issue relating to the interpretation of Notification No.8/99 Dated: 28.2.1999. Accordingly, they were heard together and are disposed of under this common order.2. The issue raised is whether the value of gods exempted under other notifications (No.5/99 dated 28.2.1999) are to be taken into account while allowing exemption under Notification No.8/99. Notification No.8/99 granted full exemption to "first clearances upto an aggregate value not exceeding fifty lakhs rupees made on or after the first day of April of any financial year" and partial exemption (5%) in respect of "clearances upto an aggregate value not exceeding fifty lakh rupees immediately following the first clearances" The exemption is in respect of clearances of "excisable goods of the description specified in the Annexure" to the Notification. While the adjudicating authority took the view that goods exempted under Notification No.5/99 are also to be included to determine, "first clearanc...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Rimjhim Ispat Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2004
Reported in: (2005)(183)ELT283TriDel
1. Heard both sides. Revenue filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal dated 20-5-2004 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Kanpur.2. Respondents made import of scrap and declared in the Bills of Entry as Heavy Melting Scrap and claimed the classification under Heading 7204.49 of the Customs Tariff and also claimed the benefit of Notification No. 21/02 as applicable to melting scrap of iron or steel.3. The declaration given by the respondent is not accepted by the Revenue and the adjudicating authority confiscated the goods on the ground of misdeclaration. The respondent filed appeal and Commissioner (Appeals) held that there is no misdeclaration on the part of the respondent and allowed the appeal.4. The contention of the Revenue is that a part of the scraps contains 3 to 10 length of "Old and used rails" and 3 to 10 length of rail sleepers. The case of the Revenue is that it is not melting scrap but re-rollable scrap, therefore, not covered under Notification No.21/02-Cus.5. Th...
Nugas Technologies India (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2004
Reported in: (2005)(181)ELT75TriDel
1. The issue raised is whether conversion of old Diesel Engine into CNG Engine involves manufacture which attracts central excise duty.2. The facts of the case are that diesel run buses of Delhi were found to be highly polluting. In order to reduce pollution, these engines were converted into CNG engines. Some of these engines were already in use from 1992 and the conversion was carried out in 2001-2002.2. The contention of the appellants is that the process carried out by them is only a conversion process rendering diesel engines fit for handling CNG. It is being pointed out that the modification made in the engines is very small. Essentially, it involves modifying cylinder head so as to take in spark plugs and modifying piston to reduce compression ratio. It is being pointed out that except for these small changes, the old engines remain intact with most original parts. During the hearing of the case, it is also pointed out that the relatively the cost of conversion is small, Rs. 20...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Flex International
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2004
Reported in: (2005)(182)ELT102TriDel
1. In this appeal, which has been filed against the impugned order in appeal by the Revenue, the issue relates to the availability of the benefit of the SSI exemption to the respondents.2. The Revenue has sought to deny the benefit of SSI exemption to the respondents who are engaged in the manufacture of Hosiery flat knitting machines on the ground that they had used the brand name "Elex" of another person namely M/s. Elex Engineering Works during the period in question i.e. 1-10-1994 to 16-9-1998, but the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has not accepted this ground and allowed the benefit of SSI exemption to them.3. We have heard both the sides. We find that the respondent is a proprietorship concern of Shri Gurdev Singh who established the firm in the year 1981. The plea of the department that he had used the brand name 'Elex' of another person namely M/s. Elex Engineering Works on the knitting machines manufactured by him in his factory, does not stand substantiated from any tangibl...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »