Delhi Court February 2008 Judgments

State Council of Educational Research and Training Vs. Ravi Dwivedi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR2008Delhi97; 2008(102)DRJ265

Mukundakam Sharma, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 21st November, 2007 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent herein. The respondent filed a writ petition in this Court seeking a direction to the appellant to admit him to a two year educational diploma course, i.e., DCET. Counsel appearing for the State points out that the said course is called the 'ETT'. Be that as it may, it can be stated that the said diploma course is being conducted in nine institutes run by the Government and ten privately managed ones with a total of 1640 seats in all. A prospectus was also issued by the State Council of Educational Research & Training wherein it was mentioned that 15% of the total seats are reserved for the candidates domiciled other than in Delhi. In view of the provisions of The Persons with Disabilities(Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995(hereinafter called as the 'Act'), three per c...

SharifuddIn Vs. Mehrun Nisa and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 148(2008)DLT154

Vipin Sanghi, J.1. This Petition under Section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act (the Act) has been filed by the petitioner landlord to impugn the order passed by the learned Additional Rent Controller Delhi in eviction Petition No. E-96/2000 dated 18.10.2001 whereby the eviction Petition filed by the petitioner landlord on the ground of bonafide requirement under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act has been dismissed. The Petition has been dismissed primarily on two grounds. The first is that the petitioner had failed to establish that the purpose of letting was only residential and the second that the petitioner himself has not appeared as witness and the evidence has been led on behalf of petitioner through his son and General Attorney Shri Zulfikar Ahmed.2. The case of the Respondent tenant was that the Respondents were heirs of the Late Ahsan Ali, who had taken on rent the premises situated on First Floor of the property No. 6360, Ward No. 14, Gali Babu Bashat, Kasabpura, Sadar Bazar, Del...

Supreme Structure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Harbans Singh and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 151(2008)DLT123; 2008(104)DRJ634

Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. This petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') has been preferred by the petitioner against an award dated 12th April 2003 whereby the Arbitral Tribunal upheld the claim of the respondent of Rs. 7,85,858/- with interest @ 24% from 9th November 2001 to 15th October 2002 amounting to Rs. 76,204/- and further interest @ 24% from 16th October 2002 till realization. Another claim of Rs. 3,40,000/- for loss of profit was also upheld. Thus total claim of Rs. 13,27,62.78 plus interest on Rs. 7,85,852/- @ 24% from 16.10.2002 was allowed and the award was passed against the petitioner.2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of deciding this petition are that the petitioner purchased Swarn Cinema from its erstwhile owner Mr. Sarabjit Singh through valid documents. Mr. Sarabjit Singh, owner of firm M/s Swarn Cinema, was having an agreement/contract with M/s Harbans Singh and Company under which M/s Harbans Singh and Compa...

H.G. Gupta and Sons Vs. Messrs Silvertone Motors Private Limited and o ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 148(2008)DLT441

Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.IA 4236/2006 (Under Order 12 Rule 6, CPC)1. This is an application filed on behalf of the plaintiff seeking judgment on admissions in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendants for directing the defendants to hand over to the plaintiffs physical vacant and peaceful possession of the suit premises, as more specifically described in the site plan annexed as Annexure-B to the plaint. The application has been made on the basis of purported admissions on the part of the defendants. The suit has been filed for possession and for mesne profits in respect of premises No. 31, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi measuring approximately 24003 sq. ft. The defendant was inducted as a tenant in the said suit property by virtue of a document which is titled as 'Agreement to Let', but in effect is a lease deed. The said lease deed has been admitted by the defendant and is marked as Exhibit P-1. It is a registered document. The lease deed was entered into on 01.09.2002 and was regis...

S.P.S. Rana Vs. National Seeds Corporation

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2007(99)DRJ227

Mukundakam Sharma, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 22.10.2007. Contention raised before us by the counsel appearing for the appellant is that the respondent cannot impose the punishment of recovery of gratuity payable to the appellant for the grounds taken in the appeal petition. It is contended before us by the counsel that the learned Single Judge failed to consider the aforesaid aspect and, thereforee, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and quashed.2. We have considered the said submission in the light of the records and also in the light of the impugned judgment and order, which is assailed before us. We have also gone through the contents of the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. We find no reason to interfere with the said findings.3. The appellant has retired from service, but before he could retire from service two departmental proceedings were initiated against him which were pendi...

Valentino Syntex Pvt. Ltd. and Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2008)(127)ECC154

1. The orders impugned in the captioned appeals affirmed demand of Central Excise Duty and the interest due thereon in respect of clearances of grey fabrics made between April and September 2005. The appellants had cleared grey fabrics without payment of duty for further manufacture into man-made fabrics by job workers.2. The appellants are registered for manufacture of processed fabrics.They cleared such fabrics on payment of duty. The grey fabrics found to have been cleared without payment of duty, were processed into man-made fabrics by job workers. These were received back by the appellants and cleared on payment of duty after undertaking various processes including export packing. The lower authorities have held the view that grey fabrics themselves were final products of the assessee and should have been cleared from the factory on payment of duty. Only inputs, as such, or partially processed inputs could be sent to a job worker for further processes or completing the manufactur...

Pnc Construction Co. Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

1. Heard both sides. Applicant filed this application for pre-deposit of amount of Service Tax of Rs. 40,61,513/- (Rs. Forty Lakhs Sixty One Thousand Five Hundred and thirteen) and penalties.2. The Commissioner (Appeals) directed the applicant to deposit Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rs. Ffifteen lakhs) towards the Service Tax and Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rs. Ten lakhs) towards the penalty for hearing of the appeal. Applicant had not complied with the condition of the stay order. Hence, the appeal is dismissed.3. The demand was confirmed on the ground that applicant is provided Business Auxiliary Service hence liable for service tax.4. The contention is that collecting toll on behalf of the National Highway Authority of India hence the applicant is not provided any service on behalf of National Highway Authority to commuters. The applicant relied upon the definition of Business Auxiliary Service as provided under the Finance Act. The contention is that Business Auxiliary is any service in relation to Prov...

Kanpur Security Services Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2008)10STR425

2. The appellants are registered with Department as Security Agency for service tax purposes. They billed M/s. BHEL, Jhansi for the gross amount of Rs. 5,59,043/- for the services rendered by them as Security Agency during the period Oct'98 to March'99, on which service tax works out to Rs. 27,953/-. The contention of the appellants is that they have received a sum of Rs. 2,40,922/- from M/s. BHEL, on which the Service tax of Rs. 12,046/- has been paid by them. Although the amount of Rs. 2,40,922/- reimbursed by M/s. BHEL does not include the service tax, yet they have paid the service tax of Rs. 12,046/- from their own pocket on this amount. The balance amount, although billed, by them, has not yet been paid by M/s. BHEL, Jhansi. The appellants have filed a CM Writ Petition No. 44498 of 1999 before the Allahabad High Court for the balance amount and have undertaken to pay the service tax on the balance amount in case they succeed before the Allahabad High Court and the amount is paid...

ishar Alloys (P) Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

2. The short point involved in the instant appeal is whether the appeal filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the Order-in-Original dt.30.3.2000 is time barred or not. The appellants have filed the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) on 27.2.06.3. (i) The appellants have contended that they had closed their mill and got its registration with the Central Excise Department cancelled on 27.8.97, and the possession of the premises was given to M/s. Mittal Alloy for carrying on their business in pursuance of mortgage deed executed on 19.8.97. The premises were in the possession of M/s. Mittal Alloy from 1997 to 30.9.05 and they were carrying on their business activities in their own name and style since 1997. The appellant again got registered with the department only on 30.9.05. They contended that the mortgage deed is a substantial evidence to establish that they were not in possession of the premise from 19.8.1997 to 30.9.05. They stated that the letters dt.27.8.97 and 30...

Saroj Lal S/O Late Sh. Dilu Ram Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Quash and set aside the order dtd 28.5.2007 and 11.5.2004 vide which the applicant's claim for the benefits of the Selection Grade of TGT in the pay scale of Rs. 2,000-3500/- has been rejected by the respondents and direct the respondents to grant the consequential benefits including arrears in pay and pensionary benefits and in pension alongwith interest @ 18% pa from the date of entitlement till the date of payment.2. It is stated by applicant that he was appointed as TGT on 03.05.1959 in the pay scale of Rs. 120-300/-. He was granted senior scale of Rs. 740-880/- on 05.9.1971, which was revised to Rs. 1640-2900/- w.e.f.01.1.1986.3. On 02.4.1985 he was promoted as PGT in the pay scale of Rs. 1640-2900/- w.e.f 01.1.1986. As per IVth Pay Commission, a person who had completed 12 years in senior scale was entitled to selection scale of TGT in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500/-. The same was not given to applicant, as he was already promoted as PGT on ad hoc basis.4. The persons junior to...