Delhi Court January 1979 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.
Nar Hari Dalmia Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-31-1979
Reported in: (1984)7ITD463(Delhi)
1. This appeal by the assessee relates to the assessment year 1975-76 and is directed against the inclasion of interest income of Rs. 920 on speculative profit of Rs. 9,200 earned in 1965 and included in the assessee's income for the assessment year 1966-67. The point has now come up before this Special Bench as the assessee contends that it is not assessable as his income on the basis of a decision of a Calcutta Bench of the Tribunal in the case of B.K. Birla [IT Appeal No. 533 (Cal.) of 1974-75, dated 23-9-1975].2. The facts of the present case are as follows : The assessee, Shri Nar HariDalmia, has been deriving income by way of dividends. On 10-1-1966 Shri Nar Hari Dalmia purporting to act on behalf of his minor daughter, Kumari Archana, contracted to purchase 10,000 shares of Indian Iron & Steel. Co. Ltd. at the rate of Rs. 23.65/23.67 per share.On 13-1-1966 those shares were sold by Shri Nar Hari Dalmia again purporting to act on behalf of his daughter at the rate of Rs. 24....
Vicco Laboratories, Bombay Vs. Hindustan Rimmer, Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-31-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Delhi114
ORDER1. This is an application under 0. 39, Rr. I and 2 of the Civil P. C. in a suit for injunction restraining defendants from using in relation to their product 'carton' and 'tube' pertaining to Cosmo Turmeric Vanishing Cream' and/or any other 'carton' or 'tube' which is deceptively similar to plaintiffs' carton and tube pertaining to 'Vicco Turmeric Vanishing Cream' so as to pass off their goods a, the goods of the plaintiffs, for recovery of rupees one lakh as damages and also to deliver tip for 'destruction all designs, blocks, tubes, cartons etc. used in the manufacture of carton and tube deceptively similar to the carton and tube of the plaintiffs.2. The suit was originally filed in the High Court of judicature at Bombay on 8tb Feb: 1978. Bharucha, J, passed the following order on 27-7-1978:'I am not satisfied that this Court has jurisdiction. thereforee, Notice of Motion dismissed . Costs of the - notice of motion to be costs in the cause.'3. The plaintiffs' counsel then applie...
Paras Ram Darshan Lal Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Delhi135; 1979RLR248
ORDER1. M/s. Paras Ram Darshan Lal filed two petitions (Suits Nos. 678-A of 1974 and 679-A of 1974) under Ss. 8 and 20 of the Arbitration Act for filing arbitration agreements in Court and appointment of arbitrators in the two cases, The cases Eire similar in nature and can be disposed of by this judgment. Petitioners' firm is a dissolved partnership firm. All the partners of the dissolved firm executed a special power of attorney in favor of Shri Darshan Lal expartner authorising him to act on behalf of the firm and to sign all documents. The petitioners allege that various contracts were entered into by them with the Union of India for construction of bridges of the value of more than Rs. 50 lakhs, that a contract for construction of four girder bridges and one Rcc Slab bridges was executed on lst May, 1965 vide agreement No. 29/GAL, disputes arose and by letter dated 22nd Sept. 1969 the respondent was requested to appoint 4n arbitrator but the respondent did not appoint any arbitrat...
Sadhu Singh and ors. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-1979
Reported in: 15(1979)DLT322
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J.(1) The appellants' land in village Naraina was acquired by the Government. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (the Act) was issued on September, 3, 1957. In due course the Land Acquisition Collector made his award (Award No. 1713 dated October 30, 1963.) The Collector divided the land in two blocks. For lands in block A he made an offer of Rs. 2250.00 per bigha. For lands in block B he offered Rs.l500.00 perbigha. (2) On a reference under section 18 of the Act the Additional District Judge raised the compensation to Rs. 4000.00 per bigha. The appellants' land was classified in block A. The judge thereforee awarded them Rs. 40CO.00 per bigha. Now there is an appeal for further enhancement. (3) Counsel for the appallants has mainly relied on two factors. In the first place he relies on a sale deed executed on December 19, 1957 in respect of khasra No. 116 by which land was sold at the rate of Rs. 5000.00 per bigha. This instance was cited in...
P.V. Mohammad Baramy Sons Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-1979
Reported in: ILR1979Delhi686
Prakash Narain, J. (1) This judgment will dispose of C.W. No. 1221 of 1978 and C.W. No. 1283 of 1978, in which identical questions of fact and law arise for determination. (2) In both the petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenge is directed to the legality and constitutionality of sub-sections (1) and (3) of Section 3 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, Clause 3(1) of the Exports (Control) Order, 1977 and Clause (3) of the Exports (Control) Twenty-Seventh Amendment Order, 1978 and the contention is that the same offend Article 14, 19(1)(f) and (g) and 31 of the Constitution. The Public Notice dated June 5, 1978 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce, Civil Supplies and Cooperation (Department of Commerce) notifying the Export Policy of wood and timber for 1978-79 is also challenged on the ground of arbitrariness and in violation of Articles 14. 19(i) (f) and (g) and 31 of the Constitution. A mandamus is also sought restraining the ...
S.B. Noronah Vs. Prem Kumari Khanna
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-25-1979
Reported in: 15(1979)DLT305; 1979RLR362
M.L. Jain, J.(1) The facts of this appeal are that the appellant is respondent's tenant in the premises B-8, Greater Kailash,Partl, New Delhi, with effect from May 10, 1968. However, on May 17, 1968, the Rent Controller granted permission to the parties under sec. 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter the Act) to create a limited tenancy for 3 years. Again on October 30, 1971, the Controller granted permission to the landlady to create a limited tenancy in favor of the tenant from November 1, 1971, to October 31, 1975. Again on November 14, 1975, Controller made the following order:- 'HAVINGregard to the facts stated in the application and the statement made by the parties, permission u/s 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act is granted to Smt. Prem Khanna appllicent to let out the premises directed in the application and shown in the plan, A.W. 1/1 for residential purpose, to Mrs. S.D. Noronha, respondent for a limited period of one year with effect from 15.11.1975.'(2) A lease-dee...
Bhai Mehar Singh Kishan Singh, Fruit Merchants, Subzi Mandi, Delhi-7 V ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-23-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Delhi158
ORDER1. This revision is against the order of the Addl. Judge, Small Cause Court, Delhi, of January 29, 1975. The petitioner had filed a suit against the Union of India, defendant No. 1, on the allegations that 17 consignments of Mosammies were dispatched to him by, M/s. Angoor Mohammed Yunus & Sons, defendant No. 2, from Madras by Railway. The consignments upon delivery were found short and damaged too. He filed a claim for Rs. 671.00, but the Railways conceded liability only to the extent of Rs. 128/-. He refused to accept such a smaller amount and in the suit, prayed for a decree of the aforesaid amount of Rs. 671.00. Issues were framed and evidence recorded. The learned Judge dismissed the suit by deciding issue No. 2 that the plaintiff being the consignee had no locus standi to sue. He relied upon a judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Union of India v. West Punjab Factories, : [1966]1SCR580 .2. Kishan Singh, P. W. 2, had deposed that his business was to advance the price to ...
Mehar Singh Kishan Singh Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-23-1979
Reported in: 15(1979)DLT217
M.L. Jain, J. (1) This revision is against the order of Additional Judge, Small causes, Court, Delhi of January 29, 1975. The petitioner had filed a suit against Union of India, defendant No. 1, on the allegations that 17 consignments of Mosammies were dispatched to him by M/s. Angoor Mohd. Yunus and Sons defendant No. 2 from Madras by Railways. The consignments upon delivery were found short and damaged too. He filed a claim for Rs. 671.00 but the Railway conceded liability over to the extent of 128.00. He refused to accept such a smaller amount and in the suit, prayed for a decree of the aforesaid amount of Rs. 671.00. Issues were framed and evidence recorded. The learned Judge dismissed the suit while deciding issue No. 2 that the plaintiff being the consignee had no locus standi to sue. He relied upon a judgment of Supreme Court reported in U.O.I, v W.P. Factories, : [1966]1SCR580 . (2) Kishan Singh Public Witness 2 had deposed that his business was to advance the price to the cons...
Bhaya Ram Ex-constable Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-23-1979
Reported in: 15(1979)DLT265; 1979LabIC863
Rajinder Sachar, J.(1) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order of dismissal of the petitioner a constable, passed by the Superintedent of police by his order of 14th November, 1969, and the further appellate order passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Range) Delhi on 26.3.1971 by which the petitioner's appeal was dismissed excepting dismissal was converted into that of removal. (2) On 30th April, 1969, the petitioner was charged under Section 7 of the Police Act with grave misconduct by attending, associating and taking active part in a meeting held on 2nd May, 1968 at New Delhi Municipal Committee, Town Hall from 6 P.M. to 8 P.M. which was said to have been sponsored by the Central defense Committee of Non-Gazetted Police Karamchari Sangh which was stated to be not a recognised Body of Delhi Police Force without permission from any senior officer. He was thus said to have contravened (1) Punjab Police Rules 14.27(2) provision of Secti...
J.K. (Bombay) Ltd. Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1979
Reported in: ILR1979Delhi407; [1979]118ITR312(Delhi)
V.S. Deshpande, J.(1) The question for decision raised by these writ petitions is whether the services of managing agents rendered by an Indian Company to a foreign company are 'technical services' within the meaning of section 80-0 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Messrs. J. K. (Bombay) Ltd., an Indian Company, that is the managing agents, entered into two agreements with two foreign companies, namely, (1) The Raymond Woollen Mills (Kenya) Limited, and (2) Raymond (Mauritius) Limited. As the foreign companies were desirous of setting up Woollen Spinning and Weaving Plants and the managing agents were the managing agents of a woollen mill in India and possessed technical information and expert industrial, A commercial and scientific knowledge, experience and skill with regard to the setting up and working of woollen spinning and weaving plants, the managing agents agreed to act as the managing agents of the foreign companies for certain fixed terms. The managing agents were to be...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »