Delhi Court February 2006 Judgments

Delhi Development Authority Through Its Vice-chairman, in a Vs. Sh. Va ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 127(2006)DLT222

Madan B. Lokur, J.1. The Respondents (writ petitioners) are the legal heirs of Shri T.L. Dewan who was allotted a plot of land by the Appellant on 13th February, 1975 bearing No. 28, Road No. 29, Punjabi Bagh Extension measuring 244 Sq. meters. Shri Dewan unfortunately passed away on 6th June, 1977. After his death, the writ petitioners wrote to the Appellant for mutation of their records by incorporating therein the names of the writ petitioners.2. A reading of the averments in the writ petition discloses a sorry state of affairs in as much as for one reason or another the Appellant kept delaying the mutation by asking the writ petitioners to produce all sorts of documents and complete various formalities. Eventually, after pursuing the matter for 12 years, the writ petitioners were successful in persuading the Appellant to recognise them as the rightful owners of the plot of land and on 8th June, 1989 a lease deed was executed between the parties. In the meanwhile, the cost of constr...

Triveny Spinning Mills (P) Ltd., Vs. C.C.E.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)(106)ECC405

1. All these appeals are directed against the same order. Therefore, they were heard together and are disposed of under this common order.2 First appellant M/s. Triveny Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. is the manufacturer of Cotton yarn. The other two appellants are purchasers of Cotton yarn from the first appellant. From 1995 the first appellant started the manufacturing of cotton yarn on cones as well as in hanks.It was clearing the yarn on cone after payment of duty, and removing hank yarn without payment of duty, because hank yarn was exempt.3. While the above is the position reveled by statutory record, Central Excise authorities visited the appellant's factory on 7.3.97. The verification of stock was made and the statement recorded of Shri Satpal, Chairman of the Company. The verification showed that a consignment of the yarn shown to have been cleared under the invoice was still in stock. It was also seen that, while invoice declared the yarn as hanks, the consignment was on cones. It m...

Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. The appellant challenges the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), Raipur, made on 1.3.2005 upholding the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Division Bilaspur, passed on 29.11.2004 by which he had rejected the refund claim of the present appellant to the tune of Rs. 10,56,648/-.2. The appellant made an application for refund of service tax on 14.6.2003, claiming the refund of the aforesaid amount on the following grounds : (a) We have wrongly paid the aforementioned amount towards the 'Consulting Engineering Services' received from a foreign company, NKK Corporation, Japan against their Invoice No. JDPL/ RMON/02 dated 2nd October-2002. The payment made through TR-6 Challan No. 01 dated 24.12.2002, "Under Protest", is covered in the return in Form ST-3 for the half year ending March, 2003 filed by us on 25.4.2003. (b) The Service Tax is exempted on the above services vide Notification No. 18/2002-ST dated 16.12.2002 to the extent of the amount paid as Research &am...

Shri B.S. Gupta and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) (Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. By virtue of this amended OA, the applicants have sought the following reliefs: 8.1 Respondents may be directed to prepare yearwise select panel for 32 unfilled vacancies for the year 1996-97, 97-98, 98-99, 99-2000, 2000-2001, 2001-2002 and also for the vacancies for the year 2002-2003 by holding DPC/Review DPC after excluding 28 vacancies already filled vide their order dated 7.10.2003 as given at Annexure A-13. The DPC preparing yearly select panel may be held keeping in view ISS rules and law laid down by the Honble Court on the subject specially the law laid down in N.R. Banerjees case and Vipin Chand Hiralal Shahs case and Nirmal Chandra Bhattacharyas case by Honble Supreme Court. Any other view will be arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India. 8.2 To encourage transparency in the administration and service matters and to safeguard the right of consideration of promotion of the applicants, the respondents may be directed to gi...

Shri Rashik Behari Goswami, S/O Vs. Union of India (Uoi) (Through the

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. By virtue of this application, a challenge has been made to an order passed by respondents on 20.02.2004 imposing upon the applicant a minor penalty of reduction by three stages for a period of two years without cumulative effect as well as an order passed in appeal on 4.10.2004 upholding the punishment.2. Briefly stated applicant, while posted at Mathura as Ticket Collector, met with a road accident in the year 1991 with the result his left leg was imputed from the knee and an artificial leg was implanted. At that time, the applicant, who had been advised stationery and light duties continued to perform stationery duties in office without any regular duties pertaining to checking at the platform.Applicant in the year 1995 was promoted as Head Ticket Collector (for short HTC) and also continued to perform light and stationery duties.One Rajesh Kumar, respondent No. 3, Divisional Traffic Manager by a duty roster dated 11.10.2003 altered the duties of the applicant of regular duties ...

Prem Nath Vishwa Nath Nanda Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in: (2006)102TTJ(Delhi)598

1. These two appeals by the assessee, one against quantum addition and other against penalty under Section 271(1)(c) against orders of CIT(A) involve a common issue and, therefore, were heard together and are disposed of through this consolidated order. In fact, only penalty appeal was fixed for today, the 2nd Feb., 2006, but as the same point was involved in quantum appeal, the second matter was also taken up and heard, with the consent of the parties.2. The facts of the case are that assessee is a dealer in vans and had purchased a Santro car from Hyundai company. There was some problem in the said car, which according to the assessee was a defective piece and assessee returned the same to the company. The company took back the car and in addition to the price also issued a credit note worth Rs. 3,25,000, which was to the following effect: Being amount credited to your account with us towards compensation for Santro Model L-2 bearing Vin No MAHAA51GRY M 078386 in terms of your vario...

Village Pul Pehladpur Residents Welfare Association and ors. Vs. Union ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 127(2006)DLT313; 2006(87)DRJ258

Vikramajit Sen, J.1. This Petition prays for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents 'not to apply pick and choose policy to demolish the houses of the residents and dispossess the occupants which are in existence in Khasra Nos. of the colony situated in Village Pul Pehladpur, Tehsil Kalkaji, Distt. New Delhi but to take action in accordance with the policies and modalities framed by the respondents Nos.1 and 2 and maintain the uniform law of equity among the residents and the occupants of the Khasra Nos.'.2. It has been contended by Mr. Ravindra Sethi, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners, that Village Pul Pehladpur falls amongst the 1071 unauthorised colonies which have been recommended to the Government of India for regularisation. Reliance has been placed, inter alia, on the Guidelines For Regularisation of Unauthorised Colonies. These Guidelines stipulate, inter alia, that colonies where more than 50 per cent plots are unoccupied or bu...

M.P. Singh Rathore Vs. State of Nct of Delhi and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2006CriLJ1366; 127(2006)DLT317; 2006(87)DRJ187

R.C. Jain, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuing a writ or direction to the police authorities to arrest the accused and to entrust the investigation of the case to CBI or Crime Branch for proper investigation.2. The petition has been made with the averments and allegations that petitioner's son-Vishal Singh Rathore, has been a student of Little Flowers Public Senior Secondary School, Shivaji Park, Shahdara, Delhi. He was illegally declared as failed in 11th standard by respondents no.2 to 4 viz., Manager, Principal and class teacher of the said school with some ulterior motives by manipulating the report card of Vishal Singh Rathore. Under the directions of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts, a case FIR 139/2004 under Sections 420/468/471/504/506/34 IPC was registered at P.S.Shahdara and investigation undertaken by the local police. The petitioner has alleged that the report card of Vishal Singh contained diff...

Indian Refrigeration Industries Vs. Ram Rattan Sharma and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 128(2006)DLT503; (2006)IILLJ1103Del; 2007(2)SLJ311(Delhi)

Markandeya Katju, C.J.1. This Writ Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment dated 02.09.2003 by the learned Single Judge, by which he has dismissed the Writ Petition.2. Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.3. The facts of the case have been set out in detail in the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge and hence we are not repeating the same except where necessary. 4. The Respondent was a workman under the petitioner. He raised an industrial dispute, which was referred to the Industrial Tribunal I, Karkardooma, Delhi. The Reference Order under Section 10(1) of Industrial Disputes Act states:-Whether the termination of service of Sh. Ram Rattan Sharma by the management is illegal and unjustified and if so to what relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect.5. Thereafter an enquiry was held in which the respondent was found guilty and dismissed from service. The petitioner filed an approval application under Section ...

Gaytri Devi Aggarwal Vs. M.T.N.L.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 128(2006)DLT496

ORDERO.P. Dwivedi, J.1. This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 27th September, 2003 passed by learned Additional District Judge whereby respondent's suit for Rs. 2,55,179/- Along with pendentelite and future interest was decreed.2. Briefly stated the facts leading to the appeal are that on 20th May, 2002 the respondent/MTNL (plaintiff in the suit) filed the suit for recovery of Rs. 3,26,629/- against the appellant herein (defendant in the suit) towards arrears due against the telephone No. 2434070 which was originally allotted to Shri Raj Kumar Aggarwal, son of the appellant at 9542/11, Multani Dhanda, Paharganj, New Delhi with STD facility. After the death of the original subscriber Shri Raj Kumar Aggarwal, the telephone was transferred in the name of Smt. Gyatri Devi Aggawal/appellant herein on her application. This transfer was affected on 9th February, 1990. From July, 2000 to December, 2000 respondent/MTNL issued the following bills to the appellant...