Delhi Court September 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.
Bhagwan Das Etc. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-14-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Delhi197; 1980RLR169
Avadh Behari Rohtagi, J.(1) In due course L.A. Collector made the award. But as there was dispute between interested persons regarding payment of compensation Collector referred the dispute to Land Acquisition Judge u/s 30 & 31 of the Act. (2) The appellant Bhagwan Dass and Kirpa Ram (Kirpa Ram s/o Molar) were declared as the bhumidars of the land acquired by the Government by the Additional District Judge by order dated November 6, 1970 made on the reference under s. 30 and 31 of the Act. There were other claimants also. Kirpa Ram and Chandgi Ram son of Thakur Singh claimed to be the owners. They claimed compensation on the ground of ownership. Then there were Ranbir Singh and Randhir Singh sons of Chandgi Ram. They laid claim to compensation on the basis of possession. After an enquiry into the respective claims of all the interested persons the land acquisition Judge came to the conclusion that Bhagwan Dass and Kirpa Ram were the bhumidars. He found in their favor and ordered that c...
Mrigendra Shum Sher Jung Bahadurrana Vs. the Income Tax Officer and or ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-12-1979
Reported in: (1980)17CTR(Del)168; [1980]123ITR329(Delhi)
ORDERSof the Income-tax Officer, Non-residents Refund Circle, Bombay, for the assessment years 1946-47 to 1956-57 are collectively made hereto Annexure 'A' forming part of the case. 3.The Late Rana expired in May, 1960, at that time he was settled in Bangalore. Subsequently the assessed's file was transferred to the Income-tax Officer, Central Circle-IV, Delhi. This Income-tax Officer, on going through the files, found that there was no trust deed on the file of the Income-tax Officer, Bombay. He, thereforee, initiated proceedings under section 147 on the legal representative of the late Rana to re-open the assessments for all these years..................'(7) We may now consider the provision relevant to the present proceedings, i.e., Section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. That portion of Section 147(a) with which we are concerned is reproduced below : '147(A).If, the Income-tax Officer has reason to believe that, by reason of the omission or failure on the part of an assessed......
Vickers India P. Ltd. Vs. Balraj Mehta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-1979
Reported in: 17(1980)DLT342; 1980RLR95
M.L. Jain, J. (1) Shri Balraj Metha, Assistant Fire Advisor, Ministry of defense built a house, C-3, defense Colony, New Delhi with Government loan. He rented it to M/s Vickers Pvt. Ltd. in the year 1966 for residential purposes. That was also a condition stated in sub clause (d) of clause (1) of the lease deed. It appears that at that time he was stationed in Simla and also needed rental income to repay the loan. When in 1968 he was transferred back to Delhi, he began to live with his parents in Nizarnuddin East. They had 3 rooms, I Barsati, I kitchen, I bath and I latrine, while the members of the family comprised the parents, his brother, two married sisters, himself, his. wife and two sons. That accommodation was insufficient for the requirements of the family and Mehta with his growing children was finding it difficult to live comfortably in East Nizamuddin. Meanwhile, he came to be promoted as Fire Advisor in the Ministry of Home Affairs in the scale of Rs. 1,800-2,250 and was al...
inder Mohan Bhardwaj Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-04-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Delhi20
Sachar, J.(1) By this petition the petitioner prays for the issue of a writ of quo warranto and seeks a declaration that respoadent No. 3, Shri H. N. Bahuguna, the Finance Minister in the Government of India, has no right under the Constitution of India to continue as a member of the Council of Ministers headed by respondent No. 2, Choudhary Charan Singh, the Prime Minister of India.(2) The challenge to the appointment of respondent No. 3 is appearently inspired by the publication in the issue of 12th August, 1979, of Sunday Standard, City Edition, New Delhi, a Letter written by respondent No. 2 on 2-4-1976 to Shri Morarji Desai, the then Prime Minister of India and the letter written by respondent No. 3 to Shri Morarji Desai on 10-7-1978. It is mentioned in the petition that respondents 2 and 3 were at the relevant times in April-July, 1978 members of the Council of Ministers in Desai Cabinet and were holding the portfolios of Home and Petroleum respectively. The letter of 2-4-78 writ...
Union of India Vs. Jagtar Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-04-1979
Reported in: ILR1979Delhi327
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J. (1) On January 20, 1976, the appellant Union of India brought an appeal from the order of the Additional District Judge dated August 28, 1975 in a land acquisition case in which the court had enhanced the compensation for the acquired land of the owner-respondent in village Jaitpur.(2) On April 14, 1976, B. C. Misra, J. admitted the appeal to a division bench and made an order for printing the records.(3) In the appeal the Union of India also moved an application (C.M. 208 of 1976) under O. 41 rule 5, Code of Civil Procedure praying for an order of stay of payment of the enhanced compensation to the owner. Of this application B. C. Misra, J. issued notice. Accordingly a notice dated May 3, 1976 was sent to the respondent informing him that 'an appeal and miscellaneous application (copies enclosed) have been filed in this court in the case noted above and the same have been admitted to hearing by an order of this court dated 14th of April, 1976'. The notice then...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›