Delhi Court July 2004 Judgments

Post Master, Post Office, Alipur Vs. Rubi

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President: 1. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 26.5.2004, passed by District Forum the appellant has preferred this appeal. 2. The main grievance of the appellant is against the award of interest @ 9% from the date of maturity till the delivery of the cheque for payment to the respondent low. Main contention of the Counsel for the appellant that there is no provision in the rules for payment of interest for the post maturity period, has no substance as it is the duty of the Post Office to make payment of the Bonds/FDRs on its maturity immediately the holder of it approaches it or writes to it, and the retention of the amount beyond the period of maturity is unauthorised and is, therefore, subject to payment of interest by the Post Office or by any other agencies on the bonds and FDRs as the case may be. 3. In the instant case Post Office took more than 6 months in making the payment of the bonds after the date of maturity and the refuge taken by the appellant that it i...

Atul Bhardwaj Vs. Maruti Udyog Ltd.

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President: 1. Feeling aggrieved of the order dated 10.7.2001 passed by District Forum, New Delhi in Complaint Case No. OC/677/99-entitled Shri Atul Bhardwaj v. Maruti Udyog Ltd., whereby the complaint of the appellant seeking replacement of the Maruti vehicle which was purchased by him from M/s. Sikand Motors or in the alternative return of the price of the car for its multifarious manufacturing defects was dismissed, the appellant has preferred this appeal. 2. Perusal of the impugned order shows that the District Forum has mainly relied on the job card Ex. R.1 which pertains to a date beyond the period of warranty and has observed that brake problem which the complainant had been raising again and again does not find any mention in this job card and, therefore, the respondent is not liable to carry out any repair or replace any part free of charge. Apart from this, the District Forum has also observed that defects pointed out by the appellant are not inherent defects or m...

Niaz Ahmad Vs. State (Delhi Admn.) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 115(2004)DLT690

Mukul Mudgal, J.1. This petitioner, a visually challenged person filed this writ petition under Article 226 and 227 seeking prosecution of the respondents under Section 307, 326, 506, 341, 342, 452 and 149 of the IPC said to be committed against the petitioner on 20th May, 1996. He further sought a security guard and the custodial detention of the respondents 7 to 12 until the compensation claimed by the petitioner was paid to him. Respondents 1 to 6 are the State and its police functionaries. There is no appearance on behalf of the petitioner in Court today. Even otherwise a detailed enquiry was conducted by Shri Qamar Ahmed, Dy. Commissioner of Police, Crime & Railways, Delhi to investigate the allegations made by the petitioner and 24 witnesses were examined and upon the conclusion of the enquiry, it was found that the allegations leveled by the petitioner could not be proved. Inter alias it was found that the allegation of an ear injury due to an air gun blast was not correct becau...

Purvi Fabrics and Texturise (P) Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(99)ECC559

1. The issue involved in this appeal filed by M/s. Purvi Fabrics & Texturise (P) Ltd. is whether they are eligible to get the refund of Modvat credit in cash.2.1 Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants are an independent textile processors engaged in processing grey fabrics received from their customers which include M/s. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. (in short RSWM); that the Revenue contended that since the Appellants and RSWM are related persons, the price at which RSWM sell the goods should form the basis of assessment of Central Excise duty; that on appeal filed by them the Appellate Tribunal vide Final Order No. 134-143/2001-A dated 4-4-2001 [2001 (131) E.L.T. 594 (T)] set aside the order and held that the Appellants and RSWM were not related persons, and therefore, they are liable to pay excise duty based on principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Ujagar Prints case; that during the interim period in view of insistence and ...

Ruby Impex Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(99)ECC541

1. These are four appeals, filed by M/s. Ruby Impex and Others against a common Order-in-Original No. 17/2002, dated 21-11-2002 passed by the Commissioner, Central Excise.2.1 Shri K.K. Anand, learned Advocate, mentioned that M/s. Ruby Impex, Appellant No. 1 and M/s. Satish Metal Co., Appellant No. 2, are registered as dealers with the Central Excise Department and are engaged in the activity of trading; that M/s. Metal Transport Carriers, Appellant No, 3 and M/s. Deepak Roadways, Appellant No. 4, are carrying on the business of transport.2.2 He submitted that the penalties have been imposed on all the Appellants on the ground that the importer of inputs, M/s. Shobit Impex, who had obtained registration for the purpose of dealing in inputs, had been issuing the invoices without physically bringing and storing the goods at their registered premises; that the allegation against Appellants Nos. 1 and 2 is that without receiving the goods, they had passed on the Modvat credit by only issui...

Tulip I.T. Services Limited Vs. Punjab National Bank

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2004(2)ARBLR447(Delhi); IV(2004)BC165; [2005]123CompCas288(Delhi); 112(2004)DLT638; 2004(75)DRJ624

Mukul Mudgal, J.1. The petitioner company which provides information technology service was an unsuccessful tenderer for computer networking connectivity in respect of a tender floated by the respondent Punjab National Bank on 4th June, 2004 and consequently its technical bid was rejected. This led to the filing of the present application under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by which interim orders under Section 9 of the Act are sought on the basis of the applicability of the Arbitration clause contained in clause 24 of the terms of tender. 2. The issue involved in the present case is whether before the signing of agreement an arbitration clause contained in the tender documents can be availed of by a unsuccessful tenderer. The learned counsel for the parties have relied upon clauses 22 and 24 of the tender terms which read as follows : ''22. SIGNING OF CONTRACT The successful bidder(s) shall be required to enter into a rate contract with PN...

Tata Sons Limited Vs. Ghassan Yacoub and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2004(29)PTC522(Del)

Mukul Mudgal, J.1. The defendants have remained ex-parte in spite of service. Affidavit by way of evidence has been filed. The suit is taken up for final hearing.2. The plaintiff was established in the year 1917 and is the parent company having large holding in major TATA promoted enterprises which include Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited (TISCO). Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Limited (TELCO). Tata Chemical Limited. Tata Donnelley Limited, Titan Industries Limited, Tata Infotech Limited, the three Tata Electric companies, Indian Hotels Co. Limited etc. It has been averred that the word 'TATA' has a deep rooted association and identification with the House of 'TATA' which is a reference to the conglomeration of TATA companies which accords recognition across the board and is inseparable from a whole range of activities in which the plaintiff and its associate companies are involved.3. The suit is directed against defendant No. 1 who is said to be owner of the defendant No. ...

Delhi Tourism and Transport Development Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2004]141TAXMAN361(Delhi)

B.C. Patel, CJ.Against the assessed, for the assessment years 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-2000, a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued. In respect of these years, this writ petition has been filed praying for the quashing of the impugned notices issued under sections 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner has come out with the case that on 13-4-2004 objections were filed and objections are not yet disposed of by the assessing officer. The Supreme Court in the case of GKN Drive shafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO (2003) 259 ITR 19 has pointed out as under .'. . However, we clarify that when a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the proper course of action for the notices is to file a return and if he so desires, to seek reasons for issuing notices. The assessing officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the notices is entitled to file objections to issuance of notice and the assessing offic...

Aar Kay Industries Vs. State Govt. of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN73(Delhi)

ORDER1. These writ petitions were disposed of on 8-10-1999. The different writ petitions were filed by the petitioners aggrieved by the orders of assessment for different years under the Sales-tax Act, 1975. The grievance of the petitioners was that there were certain records lying with the Income Tax Department, which could not be produced before the sales-tax authorities. These documents were stated to have been seized during the conduct of raids on the premises of petitioners by the income-tax authorities.2. In terms of the directions passed on 8-10-1999, the remaining books lying with the income-tax authorities were directed to be returned to the petitioners and the assessing authority under the Sales-tax Act, 1975 was directed to pass fresh orders. The petitioners, however, did not appear on the date fixed before the authorities and subsequently filed the present applications seeking extension of time for the said purpose on the ground that all the documents by the income-tax auth...

Manoj Metal Industries Vs. State Government of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2005]143TAXMAN367(Delhi)

1. These writ petitions were disposed of on 8-10-1999. The different writ petitions were filed by the petitioners aggrieved by the orders of assessment for different years under the Sales Tax Act, 1975. The grievance of the petitioners was that there were certain records lying with the Income Tax Department, which could not be produced before the sales-tax authorities. These documents were stated to have been seized during the conduct of raids on the premises of petitioners by the income-tax authorities.2. In terms of the directions passed on 8-10-1999, the remaining books lying with the income-tax authorities were directed to be returned to the petitioners and the assessing authority under the Sales Tax Act, 1975 was directed to pass fresh orders. The petitioners, however, did not appear on the date fixed before the authorities and subsequently filed the present applications seeking extension of time for the said purpose on the ground that all the documents by the income-tax authoriti...