Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-18-2012
S.RAVINDRA BHAT 1. This judgment will dispose of challenges to two Detention Orders issued by the Central Government whereby Nikhil Mondal @ Tapan [the petitioner in W.P. (Crl) 247/2012] and Jamal Seikh [petitioner in W.P. (Crl) 248/2012] were placed under preventive detention in exercise of the powers conferred upon the Central Government under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereafter referred to as “COFEPOSA”). These detention orders were served upon Nikhil Mondal @ Tapan on 06.06.2011 and on Jamal Seikh on 07.06.2011. They were confirmed by separate orders dated 23.08.2011 which were passed after the Advisory Board furnished its report to the Central Government. 2. Based on the information and intelligence received by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Kolkata Zonal Unit (hereafter referred to as the “DRI”), that a huge quantity of Fake Indian Currency Notes (hereafter referred to a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on : Dec-20-2012
G. George Paracken: 1. The challenge in this Original Application is against the order dated 23.11.aggrieved by the impugned Annexure A-1 show cause notice dated 03.03.2011 proposing to cancel his candidature for the post of Constable (Executive) Male in Delhi Police. He is also aggrieved by the Annexure A-2 order dated 02.03.2011 by which his candidature has been cancelled. 2. This case was earlier heard and disposed of by a co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal vide its order dated 15.11.2011. In fact, this O.A was allowed and the respondents were directed to give appointment to the applicant to the post of Constable (Exe.) on the ground that his case was squarely covered by the earlier order of a co-ordinate Bench in Dharam Veer Singh Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors. (OA 164/2010) decided on 25.11.2010 having its operative part as under: 6. It is not possible to agree with the arguments of the Respondents in view of the fact that the candidature of the Applicant has not been cancelle...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Mar-19-2012
Per Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J. 1. Both the appeals are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order passed by the authorities below vide which the Chinese velvet bedsheets totally valued Rs.41,32,500/- stands absolutely confiscated and penalty of Rs.10,000/- stands imposed on Shri Arun Kumar Chirania and Rs.8,000/- on Shri Rajiv Kumar Singhal. 2. As per the facts on record, the godowns premises of M/s Shyam Traders, Proprietor Shri Arun Kumar Chirania were visited by the Preventive Customs officers on 25.01.09. The godown was put to search in the presence of Shri Rajiv Kumar Singhal, business partner of Shri Chirania. 191 bundles packed in green plastic covers showing their Chinese origin were put under seizure on the reasonable belief that the same were smuggled. Shri Rajiv Kumar Singhal told the officers that the recovered Chinese blankets were brought by him and Shri Chirania through M/s Pashupati Enterprises, Kolkata with the help ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-24-2012
A.K. SIKRI1. Very brief yet crisp order dated 30th June, 2010 passed by the Copyright Board on an application preferred by the respondent no.2 herein under Section 50 of the Copyright Act, 1957 is the subject matter of the present appeal. The respondent no. 2 had filed the said application for expunction of registration number A-62685/02 granted by the Registrar in favour of the appellant herein. Before we take note of the basis on which expunction of the registration was sought, it would be apposite to find out what this registration is about. The appellant which is a registered partnership firm with its office in Kathmandu, Nepal claims that it is a well established and renowned firm engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing of sports shoes and footwear since 1990. It also boost about the excellent quality of its product which has demand in Nepal as well as in India. The goods are manufactured and marketed under the trade mark „GOLD STAR‟alongwith the side tr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-07-2012
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J. 1. These Intra-Court appeals impugn the judgments, both dated 15.02.2010 of the learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing W.P.(C) No.7406/2009 and W.P.(C) No.12356/2009 preferred by the appellant. Notice of the appeals was issued and the counsels have been heard. 2. The appellant was employed, since the year 1992, as a Steno-typist in the Session Division, Gurgaon, Haryana. He in the academic year 1992-93 joined the LL.B Degree Course as a regular student of D.S. College, Aligarh, Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar University, Agra and was in the year 1997 awarded the LL.B Degree. He however continued to serve as Steno-typist and was in the year 1999 accused of an offence under The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and convicted therefore on 15.02.2005. He, though preferred an appeal against the said conviction and which appeal was admitted by the Punjab and Haryana High Court for hearing but was in April, 2005 dismissed from service subject to outcome of the said appeal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-02-2012
SANJIV KHANNA, J. 1. These writ petitions have been preferred by Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-I impugning orders passed by the Government of India under Section 35EE of the Central Excise Act, 1944(Act, for short). The said orders are authored by Joint Secretary to the Government of India, who has been authorized to pass orders under the said Section in exercise of revisionary jurisdiction. Respondent No. 2 to the present writ petitions are the private parties, who have succeeded in the revision petition before the Joint Secretary, Government of India. 2. We are not required to deal with the individual facts in each of the writ petitions as the controversy and issue raised is legal. Facts relevant for the present decision may however be noticed. The respondent No. 2 assesses are manufacturer exporters of stainless steel utensils (not trader or merchant exporters) and had made applications for rebate/refund of the Countervailing Duty or additional duty (hereinafter referred as ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-12-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL. APPEAL No. 932/2009 % Judgment reserved on: 20th September, 2011 Judgment delivered on: 12th January, 2012 ASHOK NARANG ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Rajender Kumar, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Ritu Gauba, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J..1. Vide the instant appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment dated 06.10.2009 whereby he was held guilty and convicted and by order on sentence dated 09.10.2009, he was sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 07 years for the offence under Section 363 Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 of which he stands convicted with payment of fine of ` 5,000/- for the said offence..2. He also sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 10 years for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 with payment of `5,000/-. Crl. Appeal No.932/2009 Page 1 of 70.3. He further sentenced to undergo R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-10-2012
ANIL KUMAR, J.1. These are the applications by the plaintiff/applicant under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 and under Order 26 Rule 9 seeking interim injunction against Zee Telefilms Ltd from making, telecasting or broadcasting or in any other manner communicating to the public the television serial/cinematograph film titled `Time Bomb' and not to do anything without obtaining a license from the plaintiff and for directions to the defendants, their partners, servants, agents, representatives to hand over possession of the infringing copies and all other incriminating material including the original script and all plates for production of cinematograph film titled `Time Bomb' in a suit for permanent, I.A Nos. 4776, 4777/2005 in C.S (OS) 868/2005 Page 1 of 85 mandatory injunction and rendition of accounts for the alleged infringement of copyright of the plaintiff.2. The suit was initially filed against M/s.Zee Telefilms Ltd. During the pendency of the suit the plaintiff filed an application be...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Mar-15-2012
Per Mathew John, J. In this proceeding the main appellants, namely, A.G. Corporation, Coir Cushion Ltd. and Overseas Business Corporation, are three importers who imported thirty two consignments of apparently the same goods declared to be components of Digital Satellite Receiver/ Satellite Receiver/ Receiver DVB Set etc of Chinese origin shipped from Hongkong and also from Chinese Ports. Out of these items the main item was Populated Circuit Boards (PCB). These goods were sold to mainly to M/s Rishav Udyog which was a proprietorship firm of Mr. Kamal Pat Surana, for use in assembling receivers for Direct to Home (DTH) transmission of TV signals. 2. At the time of initial assessment of goods customs suspected undervaluation of the goods. For goods with declared value varying from HK$ 20 to HK $ 30 per piece the customs department loaded the value to values in the Range of HK$ 20.50 to HK$ 42.75 in different consignments. But later the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence did more invest...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-10-2012
Anil Kumar, J. 1. These are the applications by the plaintiff/applicant under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 and under Order 26 Rule 9 seeking interim injunction against Zee Telefilms Ltd from making, telecasting or broadcasting or in any other manner communicating to the public the television serial/cinematograph film titled `Time Bomb' and not to do anything without obtaining a license from the plaintiff and for directions to the defendants, their partners, servants, agents, representatives to hand over possession of the infringing copies and all other incriminating material including the original script and all plates for production of cinematograph film titled `Time Bomb' in a suit for permanent, mandatory injunction and rendition of accounts for the alleged infringement of copyright of the plaintiff. 2. The suit was initially filed against M/s.Zee Telefilms Ltd. During the pendency of the suit the plaintiff filed an application being IA No.4822/2005 to implead Ms.Deepa Sahi, Mr.Ketan Meht...
Tag this Judgment!