Delhi Court February 2007 Judgments

Pradeep Kumar Vs. M.C.D.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2007(114)FLR360]

Hima Kohli, J.1. With the consent of both the parties, this matter is taken up and disposed of at the admission stage itself.2. In the present petition, the petitioner has sought a declaration to the effect that the order dated 20.4.2005, passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal in ID No. 16/1999 is illegal and contrary to the provisions of law. The brief facts, which are relevant for deciding the present petition are that the petitioner workman joined the service of the respondent MCD as Lower Division Clerk (LDC) on 3.10.1981. In 1987, a charge sheet was issued against the petitioner. Pursuant thereto, an Enquiry Officer was appointed, who submitted an enquiry report to the Disciplinary Authority in 1988, wherein it was held that the charges against the petitioner to the effect that he had remained absent from duty unauthorizedly and had made interpolation in the office attendance register, stood proved. Thereafter a penalty of stoppage of two increments with future effec...

Shakuntala Vs. the State of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 139(2007)DLT178; I(2007)DMC793

Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the order dated 22nd July, 2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge observed that the allegations prima facie do show that the petitioner did have some role or the other in the entrustment and criminal breach of trust with regard to the istridhan of the complainant. However, the learned Sessions Judge went on to observe that the complaint of the complainant dated 9th November, 2001 and supplementary statement of the complainant to some extent raise much doubt to the entire prosecution story. She also observed that the complaint in substance made allegations only against her husband for having re-married during subsistence of first marriage with the complainant. The complainant in her supplementary statement, made after the registration of FIR stated that her husband had deposited part of the istridhan before CAW Cell and the remaining istr...

Raj Prem Malik Vs. Shri Gambhir Singh

Court: Delhi

Reported in: (2008)149PLR15

J.M. Malik, J.1. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the appeal is taken up for final disposal. Arguments heard.2. The appellant/defendant was proceeded against ex parte by the trial court on 6th April, 1999. It is indisputable fact that the said ex parte order was passed under Order 17 Rule 2 CPC and not under Order 17 Rule 3 CPC. Thereafter, the appellant moved an application dated 31.05.1999 before the said Court for setting aside the ex parte decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge. It was averred that two suits were filed, out of which, one suit was filed by the bank against both the appellant, who was the guarantor, and the respondent the principal borrower and the second suit was filed by the respondent against the appellant. Learned Counsel for the respondent has alleged that he has filed suit against the appellant on the ground that the truck in question was taken by the guarantor and he has earned profits after plying it. The appellant has expl...

Harish Chander and anr. Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2007(96)DRJ531

Manmohan Sarin, J.1. Appellant No. 1 Harish Chander and appellant No. 2 Chander Kanta alias Prem Kanta, had preferred this appeal assailing the judgment dated 25.11.1992 and order of sentence dated 30.11.1992, passed by then Additional Sessions Judge Shri J.B. Goel in SC No. 185/1985 convicting them under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentencing both of them to life imprisonment and payment of a sum of Rs. 2,000/- as fine and in default thereof, further RI for two years. The Trial Court held that there was no evidence of participation of accused Satish Chand, brother of Harish Chander in the crime and the charge against him had not been proved. He was accordingly acquitted of the charge under Sections 302/34 IPC. The present appeal filed by the appellants was admitted to hearing on 15.12.1992. The sentence of the appellants was suspended pending the decision of the appeal vide order dated 4.8.1993 on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- with one surety of the like ...

Banwari Lal Behl (Dead Through Lrs.) Vs. Devinder Kumar Singari and or ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: III(2007)BC167; (2008)149PLR36

A.K. Sikri, J.1. By means of this suit the plaintiff seeks to recover a sum of Rs. 20,17,000/- from the defendants. Defendant No. 1 is stated to be the sole proprietor of defendant No. 2. As per the plaintiff, defendant No. 1 is his cousin. He had approached the plaintiff on 26.2.2001 with a request to give him some loan as he was facing financial stress and had to meet various business commitments. The plaintiff agreed to give the loan and gave a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- vide cheque No. 211075 dated 26.2.2001 drawn on Punjab National Bank, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi-31. This cheque was duly encased by the defendant No. 1 and, thus, amount was received by them. The defendants also executed and delivered the following documents to the plaintiff:(a) Demand Promissory Note dated 26.2.2001 for Rs. 7,00.000/-.(b) Receipt dated 26.2.2001 for Rs. 7,00,000/-.(c) Post-dated Cheque No. 049577 dated 26.2.2002 for Rs. 7,00,000/- drawn on Vijaya Bank, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-66 in favor of the plaintif...

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kamala Behan and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008ACJ1076

V.B. Gupta, J.1. Appellant United India Insurance Co. Ltd. has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 6.6.1997 and passed by Mr. D.R. Singh, M.A.C.T., Delhi, vide which the learned Tribunal passed an award in the sum of Rs. 3,60,000 along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of judgment till realisation.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 1.6.1988 at about 8.35 a.m., deceased Javer Bhai, aged about 41 years, was traveling in the bus No. DEP 6028 (route No. 930) which was going from Rani Bagh to Tilak Nagar. When the bus reached near Punjabi Bagh, Gurvinder Singh, driver of the bus (respondent No. 9 herein the appeal) could not control the bus due to high speed and as the bus was driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit the pavement dividing the road and turned with the result that the deceased died in this accident. The bus is owned by Umesh Kumar (respondent No. 10 herein the appeal) and was insured with appellant insurance company.3...

Kamal Auto Finance Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2007)9STT221

1. The applicant filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 48,800/-. The applicants were registered with the Revenue authorities and were paying service tax. The rate of tax was increased from May, 2003 and the applicants were paying the service tax at the old rate. When the revenue pointed out, they paid the service tax.2. The applicants have a strong case for waiver of pre-deposit of penalty. The pre-deposit of amount of penalty is waived for hearing the appeal. The stay petition is allowed....

Cce Vs. Vikas Trading Company

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2007)(118)ECC126

1. Heard both sides. The revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby penalty imposed under Section 11-AC was set aside. The contention of revenue is that appellant had wrongly availed the benefit of small scale exemption, therefore, they are liable to penalty under Section 11-AC of Central Excise Act.2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are working under the small scale exemption notification. For the year 2002-2003, the appellant had shown the value of clearances as Rs. 2,97,75,485/-.As per the revenue, the appellant had not included the value of clearance of Rs. 5,81,732/- which was subsequently returned by the customers. On this ground, the revenue is of the opinion that for the subsequent year, i.e. 2003-2004, the appellants are not eligible for small scale exemption notification as the clearance for the previous year were more than Rs. 3 crores.3. The appellants paid the duty immediately before issuance of show cause notice. Thereafter, show cau...

Neha Cosmetics Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2007)(119)ECC33

1. The appellant challenges the order of the Principal Collector made on 29.12.1989 by which recovery of Rs. 3,60,089.84 was ordered under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 on the ground that the appellant had suppressed the facts of having entered into an agreement with M/s Bakson Homeo Pharmacy and also suppressed the facts of the real assessable value. By the impugned order, the seized goods valued at Rs. 66,636/- were confiscated and redemption was allowed on payment of fine of Rs. 10,000/-, besides imposing a personal penalty of Rs. 50,000/-.2. The matter has come up after the remand order dated 29.11.2006 made by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi restoring the appeal on the appellant's depositing the entire duty and penalty with a direction to appear before this Tribunal on 02.01.2007.3. Briefly stated, the case of the Revenue was that, the appellant was manufacturing the excisable goods (Arnica Hair Shampoo and Arnica Hair Oil) in the brand name of the buyer, who also w...

Asstt. Cit Vs. Modicon Network (P.) Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. The appeal is by the department and the cross-objection is by the assessee. In the appeal, the department has taken the following grounds: 1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in holding- (a) The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in estimating net income of M/s. Distacom Communication Ltd., Hong Kong at 20 per cent of the total receipts from M/s. Modicom Network Pvt. Ltd. in the nature of fee for technical services, whereas in view of Section 44D of the Income Tax Act, 196 1, 100 per cent of such total receipts were income of M/s. Distacom Communication Ltd., Hong Kong. 2. The appellant craves to be allowed to amend, delete or add any other ground(s) of appeal during the course of hearing of this appeal.2. Before we proceed to discuss and decide the issues arising in the appeal and cross-objection, it is necessary to bring on record the essential facts very briefly. Three companies viz., Modi Well vest Private Limited, Distacom C...