Delhi Court October 2007 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Meharban Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: 2007(99)DRJ400
Reva Khetrapal, J.1. The petitioner, by way of this writ petition, seeks to challenge the order of detention dated 28.09.2006 bearing File No. 347/LA.Judl./2006/760-61 passed by the Commissioner of Police under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 and approved by the Lt. Governor of Delhi by an order dated 6.10.2006 in exercise of his powers under Sub-section (4) of Section 3 of the said Act. It is not in dispute that the detention order is due to expire in the 1st Week of November in any case.2. The petitioner Meharban, a 28 year old man, is kept under detention on the ground that he is involved in 13 criminal activities during the period 20.01.2001 to 21.08.2006, including riots, dacoity, robbery, kidnapping, extortion, criminal intimidation, attempt to murder and murder, etc. apart from having committed acts punishable under Sections 2/3 of the Gangsters Act and the Arms Act. Three D.D Entries regarding threats for extortion have also been lodged against t...
Jaipal Singh Vs. Mohan Hotels (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR1164]; (2008)ILLJ964Del
A.K. Sikri, J.1. The petitioner herein, who was in the employment of the respondent Management (hereinafter referred to as the 'Management') in the capacity of Attendant (for short, the 'workman'), was issued charge sheet and a departmental enquiry was held against him as per which charges were proved, on the basis of which his services were terminated. The workman raised industrial dispute challenging his termination, which was referred to the Labour Court. The Labour Court pronounced its order dated 28.8.1993 holding that enquiry was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice and there was no defect in the enquiry proceedings. Thereafter, vide Award dated 15.3.1995, the reference is answered in favor of the Management holding that having regard to the nature of charge, punishment of dismissal was not excessive. Challenging the aforesaid order and the Award, the present petition has been filed by the workman.2. Before coming to the challenge to the aforesaid order ...
Shashi Kapoor Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ1261; I(2008)DMC201
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.FIR No. 259/07 Dated 12.4.2007Under Section 498A/406/34 IPCP.S. Punjabi Bagh1. It appears to be a case of commercial-cum-matrimonial dispute.2. Uma Kapur and Shashi Kapur seek pre-arrest bail in the afore-noted FIR which has been lodged by Aakanksha. Shashi Kapur is the wife of the younger brother of the father-in-law of the complainant. Uma Kapur is the mother-in-law of the complainant.3. Complainant married Shashank Kapur on 27.6.2004. She claims that her father spent Rs. 1.5 crores when marriage took place. 4. Allegations in the F.I.R. are that her husband was a drunkard and a drug addict and that after marriage the couple proceeded to Spain for their honeymoon. Shashank misbehaved with her and hit her. From Spain, they reached London. At London also her husband would remain in drunken condition. They were left with no money. She rang up her father-in-law and requested that some money may be sent to them. He refused. Her father had to send money. They came back ...
K.K. Mehral Vs. D.T.C.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR262]
Hima Kohli, J.1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition praying inter alia for issuance of a writ of certiorari seeking quashing of the order dated 24.5.2006 passed by the respondent/DTC, wherein it was ordered that the petitioner shall not be released gratuity and other dues, except CPF, at the time of his retirement in view of the unauthorized occupation of staff quarter by the petitioner.Counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid issue is no longer res Integra inasmuch as, vide judgment dated 6th September, 2007 passed in LPA No. 1086/2004 entitled DTC v. Dhanwant Rai and Ors., the Division Bench has upheld the order of the learned Single Judge passed on 20th September, 2004 in WP(C) No. 6573/2003 whereby the respondent/DTC was directed to pay retirement benefits like, gratuity, leave encashment, unpaid salary, etc., to the workman therein along with 10% interest per annum on the principal amount of gratuity, w.e.f. 30 days after the date of superannuation of ...
Vinay Rai Vs. Ifci Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Delhi65; I(2008)BC413
A.K. Sikri, J.1. Since we are concerned with the legality and propriety of the interim order dated 18.9.2006 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (for short, the 'Appellate Tribunal') under Section 21 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') whereby the learned Appellate Tribunal has refused to grant waiver of principal deposit of the amount and has directed the petitioner herein to deposit 75% of the amount shown in the Recovery Certificate with the respondent bank as a pre-condition for hearing the appeal, we are not taking note of the facts of the case in greater detail. However, those facts, which are absolutely necessary for disposal of this petition, would be taken note of hereafter.2. The respondent No. 2, M/s. Malvika Steel Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'company') was given financial assistance by the IFCI Limited (respondent No. 1 herein and referred to as 'IFCI') for its steel project. ...
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Vs. Sh. Balbir Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)SLJ508(Delhi)
A.K. Sikri, J.1. The Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) adopted the Assured Career Progression Scheme (for short ACP Scheme) of the Government and given the nomenclature as 'Career Advancement Scheme' vide memo dated 12.10.2000. The entire ACP scheme was adopted as it is. The question has arisen as to how this scheme is to be applied in a case where a particular employee refused promotion offered to him in the normal course. We may state the facts of this case before we dwell on this issue.2. The respondent herein joined the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan as group- D employee on 13.8.1965. On 15.3.1999 he was offered promotion to the post of laboratory attendant which he declined to accept. Another offer for promotion to the same post was given on 7.12.2000 and the respondent again turned down this offer. Before the second offer for promotion was given the Career Advancement Scheme was introduced to take care of acute stagnation in the service career of those who were not able to get pro...
Balar Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. N. Ramu Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
Reported in: 2008(36)PTC289(Del)
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. This is a joint application filed on behalf of the plaintiff and the defendant under Order 23 Rule 3 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for recording the compromise/settlement arrived at between the parties and for decreeing the suit in terms thereof.2. The plaintiff had instituted the suit in respect of its trademarks 'KUNDAN' and 'KUNDAN CAB' in respect of electric accessories and fittings including electric switch gears, main switches, fuse unit wires and cables. The defendant had adopted the mark 'KHUMAN CAB' in respect of the same goods. Now, the parties have settled the disputes whereby the defendant has acknowledged that the plaintiff is the proprietor of the trademarks 'KUNDAN' and 'KUNDAN CAB' in respect of the said goods. The defendant has also undertaken not to directly or indirectly manufacture any of the goods in question under or using the imitation labels or any other packaging material and /or wrapper bearing the trade ma...
infinity Credit Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2007
Reported in: (2008)12STJ309CESTATNew(Delhi)
1. Heard both sides and perused the records. The applicant filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of tax of Rs. 76,945.00 and penalty of equal amount. The learned advocate on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant is a proprietorship concern, which is not included in the nature of service of "Business Auxiliary Services", under Section 65(105)[zzb] of the Finance Act 1994. He further submits that the applicants already deposited Rs. 30,000.00 towards tax.2. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of records, I find that the question is as to whether the proprietorship concern, would be treated "commercial concern". As the amount of Rs. 30,000.00 tax deposited by the applicant, I find that this is sufficient for waiver of pre-deposit of balance amount of tax and penalty. Accordingly, the pre-deposit of balance amount of tax and penalty is waived till disposal of the appeal. Stay petition is allowed....
Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. R.S. Financial Services
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2007
Reported in: (2008)12VST275CESTATNew(Delhi)
1. The Revenue has challenged the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) made on 23 03-2006 setting aside the order in original by which the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 1,65,195/- as service tax imposing penalty of the like amount under Section 78 of the Finance Act 1994 and also imposing the penalty of the like amount under Section 76 of the Act, besides the penalty of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 77 of the Act and demanding interest under Section 75.2. The Revenue noticed that the respondent-assessee were providing 'Business Auxiliary Services' without getting registered and were not paying ser-vice tax due on the services provided by them. They were providing 'Business Auxiliary Services' by way of processing loan applications for commercial vehicles obtained by their sales/marketing representatives. They were then processing the applications and after scrutinizing them were forwarding the same to the bank. In cases where the loan applications were approved, they w...
Bharati Hexacom Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2007
Reported in: (2008)9STR474
1. The appellant has challenged the order of the Commissioner made on 16-5-2007 confirming the demand of service tax credit for Rs. 16,61,582/- on the ground that it was wrongly taken and availed by the appellant and directing recovery thereof and also imposing penalty of the like amount under Section 78 in respect of the said amount. They have also challenged the demand of service tax amounting to Rs. 8,57,850/-, which is ordered to be recovered under the impugned order with the penalty imposed for the like amount under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner has also imposed penalty (r) Rs. 100/- per day under Section 76 of the Act, besides penalty of Rs. 1000/- under Section 77 which also has been challenged by the appellant.2. In the context of the demand of Rs. 16,61,582/-, the Commissioner found that the input service of the assessee i.e. circuit lease line fell under the category (zd) of Section 65(105) of the Finance Act, 1994, whereas their output service, i.e.,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »