Delhi Court January 2005 Judgments

Sita Ram Aggarwal Vs. Customs

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 117(2005)DLT54; 2005(79)DRJ554; 2005(188)ELT478(Del)

Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. The learned counsel for the petitioner, while arguing the application for regular bail under Section 439, submitted that the two allegations made against the petitioner are that offences have been committed under Sections 132 and 135(1)(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. He submits straightway that Section 132 is a bailable offence and it is only on account of the allegation that an offence under Section 135(1)(a) has been committed that he is before this court. He further pointed out that by a subsequentamendment which came into effect in 2004, sub-section 3 has been added to Section 137 whereby it is now provided that:-''any offence under this chapter may, either before or after the institution of the prosecution, be compounded by the Chief Commissioner of Customs on payment, by the person accused of the offence to the Central Government, of such compounding amount a say be specified by rules''.2. Thus, according to him, even if an offence under Section 135(1)(a) i...

Kutub Properties Private Ltd. Vs. C.L. Construction Company

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(1)ARBLR269(Delhi); 117(2005)DLT208; 2005(80)DRJ60; (2005)140PLR24

Vijender Jain, J.1. This petition has been filed impugning the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 23rd July, 2003 whereby exercising jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The learned Single Judge noticed that there was an arbitration clause which has been reproduced in the impugned order and the work was to be completed in terms of tender/contract clauses which was enclosed to a letter given by the appellant to the respondent. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently contended that there was no signed arbitration agreement between the parties, only one letter was given to the respondent and on the basis of said letter, the finding of the learned Single Judge that there was a valid concluded arbitration agreement between the parties was perverse. Mr. Chawla has further contended that the petition under Section 11 filed by the respondent was pre-mature as no request was made by the respondent invoking the arbitration clause. Ano...

Mahinder Singh Vs. the Estate Officer and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 117(2005)DLT258; 2005(80)DRJ67

Manmohan Sarin, J.1. Rule.With the consent of the parties, writ petition is taken up for disposal.2. It is stated that an additional affidavit in terms of the order dated 8th November, 2004 has been filed. The said affidavit was not on record and during the hearing, a copy was made available for perusal. Let the original affidavit, as filed, be placed on record.3. By this writ petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the judgment dated 17th December, 2002 passed by Shri Raghubir Singh, Addl. District Judge dismissing petitioner's appeal against the order of eviction passed under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 dated 16th November, 2002. The order of eviction was passed on account of sub-letting of part of quarter No. T-12/2, Uri Enclave, Delhi Cantt. to one Havaldar Ramesh Malik and his family. The order of eviction also referred to some additional unauthorised construction. However, this ground had not been mentioned in the show cause notice issued. 4....

Lal Mohd. Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005CriLJ3055; 119(2005)DLT353; 2005(81)DRJ738

Manju Goel, J.1. This revision petition arises from the order dated 19.4.2004 whereby the Court of Sessions declined to accept the claim of the petitioner Lal Mohd. to be treated as a juvenile.2. Accused Lal Mohd. is accused of having been involved in the offence of kidnapping and murder of Vikas Bhandari on 13.11.2000. He and his associates namely Rajnish, Rakesh and Romil were arrested on 18.11.2000. Eventually he was challaned and was committed to Sessions and charges u/s 120B read with 364/302/201 IPC were framed against all the accused including the petitioner. The petitioner moved an application for treating him as juvenile on which Mrs. Aruna Suresh, Ld. ASJ directed that the juvenile along with the documents submitted by him be forwarded to the Juvenile Justice Board for conducting an enquiry and for submitting a report in this regard. Juvenile Justice Board opined that the accused Lal Mohd. was 15 years and 3 months on the date of his arrest and sent the file back to the court...

Hawkins Cookers Ltd. Vs. Rakesh Kumar,

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(30)PTC375(Del)

Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. In spite of being served, defendant chose not to join issues with the plaintiff. After filing written statement, defendant absented from entering appearance. Vide order dated 7.5.2003, defendant was proceeded ex parte. Plaintiff was directed to lead evidence by way of affidavits. Needful has been done by the plaintiff.2. Plaintiff is a company engaged in the manufacture of pressure cookers and parts thereof. Vide registration No. 179714, plaintiff holds registration in its favor under class 21 of the Trade and Marchandise Marks Act, 1958 in respect of the word 'Hawkins'. Registration continues to ensure for the benefit of the plaintiff. Thus, plaintiff claims to be the holder of proprietory rights in the trade mark/name 'Hawkins'.3. As per the plaintiff, the trade mark Hawkins forms a predominant feature of its corporate name and trading style. In common parlance, plaintiff is referred to as Hawkins.4. Plaintiff claims that the trade mark Hawkins appears and is ...

State Bank of India Vs. K.L. Sehgal

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President: 1. Vide impugned order dated 27.11.2004, passed by the District Forum, the appellant who is office holder of State Bank of India Retired Employees Scheme (in short scheme) has been directed to make payment of Rs. 17,281/- with interest @ 9% from 1.1.2002 till realisation besides Rs. 2,000/- as cost of litigation towards the expenses incurred by the respondent on his medical treatment. Feeling aggrieved he has preferred this appeal. 2. Facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that the respondent retired as an officer from the service on 31.12.1996 and was enrolled in the scheme of the appellant for medical expenses to be reimbursed. After having enrolled as member of the scheme he was neither provided card nor the passbook to avail the facility. The respondent got treatment from Divya Prabhat Maternity Centre, Rohini, Delhi and according to the discharge slip he was suffering from Asthma and heart problem and after discharge he submitted the bill with the Zo...

Banswara Textile Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(100)ECC382

1. M/s. Banswara Textile Mills Ltd. have filed the present appeal being aggrieved with the Order-in-Appeal No. 525/2003, dated 20-11-2003 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).2. Shri K.K. Anand, learned Advocate, submitted that the appellants manufacture processed textile fabrics on job charges basis; that the Superintendent (Central Excise) directed them under letter dated 2-4-2001 to make payment of duty taking the assessable value @ 115% of production cost of processed fabrics in terms of Rule 8 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000; that as the duty was payable on the assessable value determined in terms of the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Ujagar Prints, 1989 (39) E.L.T. 493 (S.C.), they requested for provisional assessment under Rule 9B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944/Rule 7(1) of the Central Excise (No. 2). Rules, 2001; that the differential duty was also paid by them to the Department/that, finally, the Board clarified ...

Stovec Industries Limited Vs. Cc

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(186)ELT225TriDel

2. Appellant filed this appeal against the order in appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). The brief facts of the case are that appellant made import of Nickel Pellets declaring the value of the goods @ 12660.75 USD PMT. The Revenue did not accept the value declared by the appellant and value was enhanced to 16365 USD PMT on the basis of Metal Bulletin for the month of January.3. The contention of the appellant is that they are regular importer and they have entered into an agreement with the supplier of the goods and as per the agreement the value of the goods is to be fixed on the basis of LME cash settlement average price for the previous month plus premium of 570 USD PMT. As per this agreement the supplier of the goods in the month of December offered the price @ 12660,75 USD PMT. The offer was made on the basis that in the month of November as per LME cash settlement average the price was $12,090.75 per tonee and $570 premium was added. The contention of the appe...

Universal Ferro and Allied Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(101)ECC124

1. The issue involved in these four appeals filed by M/s. Universal Ferro & Allied Chemical Ltd. relates to disallowance of Modvat credit and confirmation of demand of Central Excise duty on slag.2. Shri K. K. Anand, learned Advocate, mentioned that the Appellants manufacture Ferro Alloys and avail of Modvat Credit of the duty paid on inputs, carbon paste; that they manufacture high carbon ferro manganese, low carbon ferro manganese, medium carbon ferro manganese and Silico manganese; that during the manufacture of High Carbon Ferro Manganese, ferro manganese slag is generated which is used captively in the manufacture of Medium and Low Carbon Ferro Manganese; that some quantity of Silico manganese is also used captively in the manufacture of Medium/Low Carbon Ferro Manganese; that the slag and silico manganese were used captively without payment of duty availing the benefit of Notification No. 217/86-CE dated 2-4-86; that the Appellants also clear their finished goods at nil rate...

Sarbans Singh and ors. Vs. State of Nct of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005CriLJ2625; 116(2005)DLT698; I(2005)DMC305; 2005(79)DRJ542

Manju Goel, J.1. The petitioners have been charged for offences under Sections 498A/304B of the Indian Penal Code. The deceased got married to petitioner No. 3, Charanjit Singh, on 26.3.2000. She committed suicide on 26.5.2000. The FIR was registered on the statement Sohan Singh Gujral, the father of the deceased, which was recorded by Shri Shamim Akhtar, SDM on 29.5.2000. He narrates in the statement that Sarabjeet was married to Charanjit and thereafter she went with her husband on a honeymoon to Dalhousie; That Charanjitbrought her back to Jabalpur on 6.4.2000 so that she could take her B.Ed. examinations; that Sarabjeet left Jabalpur, the deceased parents' house asking her to secure good marks in her examination; that Sarabjeet stayed there till 13.5.2000 and during this period Charanjit used to call her up but Sarabjeet remained sad; that on enquiry she kept saying that they were making demands and were not able to adjust with her; that on 12.5.2000 Charanjit came to take her back...