Delhi Court September 2005 Judgments

R.N. Katyal and ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(85)DRJ465

Vikramajit Sen, J.1. The dispute in these Petitions relates to promotion to the post of Deputy Chief General Manager (Traffic). The Petitioners asserts that the distinction between the Mechanical and Traffic Department had evaporated in the recent past. Persons from these two streams were, according to the Petitioners, freely appointed to posts in the Traffic Department and the Mechanical Department. So far as the DTC is concerned it is their stand that the distinction has always been maintained, except for a few postings made purely temporarily for short durations necessitated by exigencies of service. The Petitioners are from the Mechanical Department and the other Respondents from the Traffic Department.2. The Petitioners joined the DTC as Graduate Engineers/Trainee Apprentices in 1973-1974 and were promoted as Assistant Engineers/Managers in 1976-77. The contesting Respondents No. 2 & 3 are stated to have joined DTC in 1982 as Deputy Managers and were promoted as Traffic Superinten...

Aishwarya Telecom Pvt. Ltd. (Through Sales Engineer) Vs. Bharat Sancha ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2005(2)CTLJ161(Del); 124(2005)DLT209; 2005(84)DRJ263

Madan B. Lokur, J.1. The Petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of Respondent No.1 to load its tender with the cost of additional fibre holders. As a result of loading, the Petitioner (who was the lowest bidder) became the third lowest bidder and, thereforee, would not be entitled to the tender floated by Respondent No.1. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that on 25th April, 2005 Respondent No.1 floated a tender for supply of 84 ribbon type O.F. Splicing Machines. These machines consist of several items and accessories including (1) Optical fibre hot jacket remover (2) High precision cleaver ribbon (3) Electrode (4) Fuse (5) Fibre holder etc. etc. 3. As far as fibre holders are concerned, 84 sets thereof were required by Respondent No.1 as per the bid documents. 4. The Petitioner as well as some others including Respondents No. 2 and 3 gave their bids and in the chart given by Respondent No.1 in its counter affidavit, the evaluated package cost of all the eligible bidders, who wer...

Ravi Dhankar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 124(2005)DLT319; [2006(108)FLR175]

Sanjiv Khanna, J.1. The petitioner, Mr. Ravi Dhankar, has filed the present writ petition against the order of Central Administrative Tribunal dated 21.5.2003 dismissing O.A.No.3257/2002 filed by one Mr. Ishwar Singh against the Commissioner of Police, Government of NCT of Delhi.2. Mr. Ishwar Singh is the grand-father of the petitioner herein and had filed the aforesaid Original Application before the Tribunal seeking appointment of the petitioner in Delhi Police on compassionate grounds. Mother of the petitioner, Mrs. Sumitra Devi, was working as a Head Constable in Delhi Police. She committed suicide and expired on 9.11.1995. Thereafter, the father of the petitioner made an application with Delhi Police for appointment of the petitioner as Constable on compassionate grounds on 23.9.1996. In response to this application, the petitioner's father was informed that the petitioner was minor and he may apply for the post of Constable on compassionate grounds as and when he becomes major an...

Kanshi Nath Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 124(2005)DLT413; 2005(84)DRJ506

Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment and/or order dated 17.04.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby the petitioner's appeal against the judgment dated 29.10.1990 and order on sentence dated 31.10.1990 was dismissed. By the judgment dated 29.10.1990, the Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, had convicted the petitioner for violation of Section 2(ia)(m) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the 'PFA Act') which is punishable u/s 7/16 of the PFA Act. The petitioner was accordingly sentenced on 31.10.1990 by the said Metropolitan Magistrate to undergo six months RI and a fine of Rs.3,000/- was also imposed on him.2. It is alleged that on 09.11.1987, Food Inspector S.K. Nagpal, took a sample of Dhania powder from the petitioner Kanshi Nath who was carrying on business under the name and style of M/s Kanshi Nath Motilal at 6549C, Khari Baoli, Delhi. It is the case of the complainant that ...

Nav Nirman Cooperative Ghs Vs. R.C. Gupta

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President: 1. Appellant is a Cooperative Group Housing Society. Respondent is its member. He was allotted a flat No. 156, Ankur Apartments by the appellant society. Though the flat was allotted in the year 1991 but major defects including flooring, plastering, finishing wood work, etc. were brought to the notice of the society on 23.6.1992. Since the defects were not removed by the appellant-society, the respondent sought redressal from the Consumer Forum. 2. Vide impugned order dated 16.5.2001 the District Forum directed the appellant society to pay an amount of Rs. 5,000 as damages/compensation and Rs. 1,000 litigation cost and also pay Rs. 24,577 as per estimate furnished by the respondent to the society to repair the sunken floor. Feeling aggrieved of the above order, the appellant has preferred this appeal. 3. First and foremost question raised by the appellant is that the respondent is not a consumer vis-a-vis the society and, therefore, the District Forum has no jur...

Ansal Properties and Industries Ltd. Vs. Vijay Raj Mahajan

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President: 1. Respondent purchased a shop No. GF-69, Sushant Vyapar Kendra (S.V.K.) from the appellant for a consideration of Rs. 2,73,975. As per Clause 16 of the Sale Deed the respondent was entitled to apply for separate water connection. It is alleged that in spite of having received Rs. 8,000 from the respondent for installation of water connection the appellant did not provide the same and after some time offered to refund it by expressing its inability to provide water connection. On account of failure of the appellant in not providing the water connection the respondent alleged loss of Rs. 3,00,000 as he had intended to run a restaurant in the said shop. 2. For deficiency in service in not providing the water connection as agreed by the appellant, the appellant vide impugned order dated 30.12.2002 has been directed to refund the amount of Rs. 8,000 with 15% interest and pay damages of Rs. 20,000. 3. Feeling aggrieved the appellant has directed this appeal. As is ap...

Lovely Coop. Group Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Irfan

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President: 1. Appellant is a Co-operative Group Housing Society of which the respondent is a member. On account of excessive charging towards the electricity consumption through a sub-meter, the appellant has been vide impugned order dated 21.8.2003, directed to issue a revised bill and to refund the proportionate amount with interest @ 15% per annum to the appellant and pay Rs. 50,000 as compensation towards the harassment and injury suffered by the appellant, as the appellant remained without electricity for two months and Rs. 1,000 as cost of litigation. 2. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has directed this appeal. Admittedly, according to the appellant, the electricity charges pending against her on the basis of the revised bill as per direction of the District Forum are to the tune of Rs. 10,000. While on the other hand, appellant contends that respondent is liable to pay the arrears of Rs. 12,000 towards the electricity charges. There is no dispute that the Society h...

Global SpIn Weave Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)(193)ELT478TriDel

1. When the matter was called, none appeared on behalf of the appellant. Therefore, the appeals are being taken up in the absence of the appellant. Heard the learned SDR also.2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Bulk Drugs (Paracetamol). On 24-2-1998, the officers of the revenue visited factory of the appellants and during the verification, batch register and loose papers showing clearance of the goods were recovered from Shri R.S. Chauhan, Factory Manager and Shri Dinesh Tyagi, Cashier. During the verification of the stock, it was also found that inputs on which credit has been taken were found short.Show cause notice was issued demanding duty which was calculated on the basis of clearances mentioned in the batch register and in the private records. Modvat credit availed on the inputs were found short was disallowed. Adjudicating authority confirmed the duty and imposed equal amount of penalty under Section 11 AC of the Central Exci...

Khabros Steel India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The matter is before us for the 3rd time. The present impugned order has been passed pursuant to the order of remand [Order Nos. 9-10/2002-B dated 7-1-2002] by the Tribunal. But the contention of the appellant is that the order is not in terms of the remand instructions.2. The appellant was an EOU and imported capital goods without payment of duty. Similarly, it procured indigenously some capital goods without payment of duty. It stopped production and the export by December 1992.Thereupon, it was incumbent upon the appellant to discharge duty liability on the capital goods received without payment of duty, since it had not fulfilled the condition of the Letter of Permission (LOP).The dispute in the present proceedings is in relation to the quantum of duty payable on capital goods, as well as whether duty of over Rs. 23 lakhs was required to be paid on consignment it had cleared from its factory under Bond on 23-12-92 for export.3. The dispute with regard to the duty on capital goo...

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Bali Medical and Dental Centre

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)98TTJ(Delhi)644

1. This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of learned CIT(A), dt. 14th Nov., 2000 for the block period 1st April, 1987 to 12th Jan., 1998 under Section 158BC(c)/143(3) of the IT Act, 1961.2. Shri K.C. Jain, CIT-Departmental Representative, appeared on behalf of the Revenue, whereas Shri O.P. Dua and Ms. Jaya Verma, advocates, represented the assessee. "On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in: (i) deleting the addition of Rs. 71,097 made by the AO on account of undisclosed income; (ii) deleting the addition of Rs. 42,33,686 made by the AO on account of suppressed receipts on the basis of admission made by the partners in their operations." 4. Before dealing with the grounds of appeal, we consider it proper to narrate the circumstances pertaining to this matter, which are as under : 4.1. The assessee is a registered firm and is running a nursing home in the name of Bali Nursing Home. It had four partners, namely, Dr. R.K.Bali, D...