Delhi Court August 2005 Judgments

V.K. Thukral and ors. Vs. Lalit and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: IV(2005)ACC9; 2006ACJ2440; 123(2005)DLT203; 2005(84)DRJ146

Pradeep Nandrajog, J.CM No. 9034/2005 1. By way of the present application, appellants pray that delay in filing the appeal be condoned.2. Appellant No. 1 is the sole proprietor of appellant No. 2. A Maruti Car bearing No. DL-4C 1136 was purchased by appellant No. 1 in the name of his sole proprietory firm. The motor vehicle hit a cyclist on GT Karnal Road near Kokli Turning Point. Unfortunately, the cyclist died. Accident took place on 13.4.99 at about 3.30 P.M. Wife, children, father and mother of the deceased filed a claim petition under the M.V. Act, 1988. They claimed compensation against the appellants and the New India Assurance Company Limited, the insurance company with whom appellants had got the motor vehicle insured.3. At the end of the trial, learned MACT held that the death of the deceased was caused due to the rash and negligent manner in which appellant No. 1 was driving the motor vehicle. Compensation in sum of Rs. 4,33,800/- was assessed.4. On the issue of the liabili...

Smt. Swaran Lata Vs. State and Sh. P.P. Sharma

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR2006Delhi21; 123(2005)DLT264; 2005(84)DRJ135

Vijender Jain, J.1. Appellant is aggrieved by grant of Letters of Administration on a copy of Will dated 15th June, 1984, Ex. PW1/2. Dr. Sidhu, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has challenged the impugned order on the following grounds:-1.That the petition for grant of Letters of Administration did not bear proper verification in as much as it was not in consonance with the provisions of Section 281 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and, thereforee, the same was liable to be rejected.2. That the Will was a fabricated document and was brought into existence after the death of the testator Sudershan Lal.3. That the evidence of the two attesting witnesses to the Will, namely, Pehlad and Kulbhushan was not worthy of reliance.4. That the registration of the Will was not proved as per Section 61 of the Registration Act, 1908.2. Needless to say that Mr. Makhija learned counsel appearing for the respondent refuted the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the appellant.3. Tak...

Sri Narayan Prasad Jalan Vs. Sri Chetan P.S. Chauhan and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR2006Delhi8; 2005(3)ARBLR212(Delhi); 123(2005)DLT270; 2005(84)DRJ331

ORDERThe application 24G is accepted. While staying the further proceedings of the cases, the prayer for sending the matter for arbitration is accepted. The parties suggest the name of the arbitrator. The record of case be put up on 30.7.2005 for further proceedings.' 8. Mr.Mukund, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that having regard to the scope of the proceedings under Section 8 of the Act and the fact that the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Moradabad has acceded to the prayer of the petitioner contained in application under Section 8 of the Act to refer the parties to arbitration, the said court was not justified in making the order for staying the further proceedings in the case or to direct the parties to suggest the name of the arbitrator. This aspect indeed calls for a consideration of the scope of the powers of the judicial authority before which an action is brought in a matter which is the subject matter of an arbitration agreement. The expression ?orefer th...

Anurodh Constructions Vs. Delhi Development Authority and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(84)DRJ314

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.IA No. 3236/1998 IN CS (OS) No. 693A/1995This is an application for issuance of notice for filing of the Award, which has also become infructuous and is, thus, disposed of.IA No. 5430/1998 IN CS (OS) No. 693A/19951. These objections are filed by DDA under Sections 30 and 33 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 in respect to the Award made and published on 19.02.1995 by Shir S. Nagarajan, Sole Arbitrator. The disputes relate to the Agreement bearing No. 37/EE/UVDI/85-86 in respect of the construction of EWS Housing of Category I at M.B. Road near Village Lado Sarai. In terms of the Agreement, the stipulated date for starting the work was 26.09.1985 and for completion of work was 25.03.1986. Thus, the period of six months was provided for the completion of work. The actual date of completion of work is 21.06.1987.2. The disputes arose between the parties arising from the claims made by the petitioner / claimant and the Engineering Member of DDA appointed the Sole Arb...

B.K. Gaur Vs. Delhi Transco Ltd. and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 122(2005)DLT704

S. Ravindra Bhat, J. 1. Issue Rule. With consent, matter was finally heard.2. In these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks appropriate directions to the respondent (hereafter NDPL) to consider his case for two time bound promotions w.e.f. 01.10.92 and 13.03.99 respectively in terms of an order of the erstwhile DESU (subsequently succeededto by the DVB) dated 16.07.92 and the order dated 23.07.97 as amended later. Consequential directions to release arrears of salary and emoluments have also been sought.3. The petitioner, a permanent employee working with the NDPL from the year 1968, was promoted to the post of Inspector; he was confirmed on 15.01.92.4. A scheme was introduced on 16.07.1992 ('the 1992 scheme') to relieve the stagnation of employees. Those employees/officers in service, who had completed 11 years of services were allowed benefits and given scale of pay upon completion of requisite period of service. It is averred that the petitioner ha...

Girdharilal Sugar and Allied Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. In these appeals which have been preferred against two orders-in-appeals as detailed above, the issue relates to the denial of Modvat credit to the appellants on the goods detailed therein.2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of the sugar and molasses. The Modvat credit has been denied to them on disputed goods on the ground that the same do not fall within the definition of 'capital goods' under Rule 57Q. Ld. DR has contended that the goods in question are only structures embedded to earth and do not form part of any machine and machinery, therefore, no credit is admissible on the same to the appellants.3. On the other hand. Ld. Counsel has argued that all the goods in question had been used in or in relation to the capital goods installed in the factory, by the appellants for the manufacture of the sugar and molasses These goods are to be taken as part of the machines and machinery.4. I have gone through the record. The goods/items involved in Appeal No. E/3113/04 are...

Kukar Sons (indo-french) Exports Vs. Commr. of Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(188)ELT488TriDel

2. Appellant filed this appeal against the adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Jaipur. In this case the appellant has cleared the quantity based advance licences for duty free import of concentrates, glass bottles, spray pumps, packing and labelling materials etc. with obligation to export perfumes. The appellant made import of the goods mentioned in the advance licence through Commissioner of Customs, New Custom House, New Delhi and same quantity was imported through ICD, Jaipur. A combined show cause notice was issued to the appellant for demand of custom duty of Rs. 51,05,205/- in respect of imports made through Customs Exports Cargo, New Customs House, New Delhi and demand of custom duty of Rs. 79,93,550/- in respect of goods imported through ICD, Jaipur. The custom duty was demanded under proviso to Section 28 of Customs Act read with condition No. (ii) to (v) and (vii) of Notification No. 204/92, dated 19-5-92.The proceedings in respect of goods imported th...

Bharti Televentures Ltd. Vs. Dss Enterprises Private Ltd. and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(2)ARBLR561(Delhi); 123(2005)DLT532

Vikramajit Sen, J. 1. Should the Court decline to enter upon the controversy of whether an implementable arbitration agreement exists between the parties has yet again arisen like the mythical phoenix from the ashes of litigation. Mr. Rajiv Sawhney, learned Senior counsel for the contesting Defendant has contended that the Court must forthwith refer the parties to arbitration, leaving it to the Arbitral Tribunal to decide upon its own jurisdiction viz. whether the parties before it had agreed to resolve their disputes through arbitration and/or whether the original compact to this effect does not subsist as it had been abandoned and given up or should be deemed to have been given up. In this case I have not been presented with a clean slate on which to write the judgment inasmuch as the controversy between the parties has received jural attention already. Benefitting from the detailed and erudite legal submissions made before me, it is my understanding that if possible or plausible cas...

Kirandeep Kaur Vs. Regional Passport Office and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR2006Delhi2; 123(2005)DLT143; 2005(84)DRJ157

Vikramajit Sen, J.1. Rule.2. The facts in this case are not in dispute and are in a narrow compass. The writ petition can thereforee be disposed of at this stage itself. 3. The parents of the Petitioner were Afghan Nationals. According to the Petitioner's father Mr.Manohar Singh, who is present in Court, he came to India along with his wife in 1979 and has since then been living in India uninterruptedly. On 27.3.1991 a Certificate of Naturalisation has been issued by the Government of India to both the parents of the Petitioner. The Petitioner was born in New Delhi on 4.2.1984 and has already travelled outside India on an Indian passport. Counsel for the Respondents have explained that this was permissible because of the naturalisation of the parents of the Petitioner, as she had not attained the age of majority.4. Counsel for the Petitioner relies on Section 3 of the Citizenship Act, 1955 which prescribes that every person born in India on or after 26.1.1950 but before 1.7.1987 shall ...

Kanpur Detergents and Chemicals Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. In this appeal, which has been filed against the impugned Order-in-Appeal, the issue relates to the denial of the MODVAT Credit of the amount in question i.e. rupees 1,29,029/- with equal amount of penalty, to the appellants.3. From the record, it is apparent that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of detergent cake and powder. During the manufacture of these products, acid slurry and acid spent are also produced by them which are classifiable under Chapter 34 of CETA and chargeable to duty.They had taken the credit of the amount in dispute. They had availed the credit of the amount in dispute on the inputs used in the manufacture of these products.4. The credit had been sought to be denied to the appellants on the ground that they had cleared the spent acid to the manufacturers of the fertilizers without payment of duty by availing the benefit of Notification No. 5/98, but it remains undisputed that those clearances were made by following the Chapter X procedure, under ...