Delhi Court March 1980 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.
State (Delhi Administration) Vs. Ved Perkash
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-11-1980
Reported in: 1980RLR304
M.L. Jain, J.(1) The respondent Ved Parkash is accused of an offence u/s 302 Indian Penal Code for burning his wife by pouring kerosene oil over her on August 31, 1979. A report u/s 173 Cr. P.C. was filed in the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate against him within 90 days but without the report of the Central Forensic Science Laboratory and a scaled site plan which is required in pursuance of the High Court Rules to be prepared by a draftsman. The police purported to rely upon those documents and called their report an incomplete challan. (2) The accused moved for bail. Relying upon Hari Chand and Rajpal v. State, 2nd (1977) Ii Delhi 367, the learned Additional Sessions Judge granted him bail on 14.12.79. According to the learned Judge, the challan was incomplete for want of the said two documents and may further require examination of the draftsman and the technician u/s 161 Cr. P.C. and since 90 days were over, the accused was entitled to bail under the proviso (a) to S. 167(2) Cr...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi (Central) Vs. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-11-1980
Reported in: [1980]126ITR736(Delhi)
S. RANGANATHAN J. - These are three references under s.18 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 (hereinafter shortly referred to as 'the Act'). The references pertain to the surtax assessment of M/s. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. New Delhi, for the assessment years 1968-69 to 1970-71. They raise common questions which have been referred to us by the Tribunal in the following terms :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that rule 4 of the Second Schedule of the Surtax Act refers only to such income, profits and gains which are not at all includible in the total income as computed under the Income-tax Act and not to items of deductions permitted under Chapter VI-A of the Income-tax Act,1961 ?2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in cancelling the orders of the Commissioner u/s.16(1) of the Surtax Act for the assessment years 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71 ?'The surtax assessments of the above company for the assessment years 196...
Subhash Chander Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-1980
Reported in: 17(1980)DLT478
G.R. Luthra, J.(1) The present revision petition is directed against an order dated 3rd December 1979 of Shri R. K. Sharma, Sub Judge I Class, Delhi. Vide that order the learned Sub Judge had accepted an application of Shri Ram Parkash under Order I Rule 10 Civil Procedure Code for being imp leaded as defendant in the suit filed by the present petitioner.(2) The present petitioner Shri Subhash Chander brought a suit for perpetual injunction restraining Municipal Corporation of Delhi, respondent No. I and Zonal Assistant Commissioner, Karol Bagh, Tibbia College, New Delhi respondent No. 2, its employees and agents from demolishing any porton of the shop in property Nos. 2643-2645/3, Bank Street, Beadonpura,Karol Bagh, Delhi. According to the petitioner he is a tenant in respect of a shop in the said property on a rent of Rs. 400.00 per month excluding water and electricity charges. The petitioner received a notice under Section 343 and 344 of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act for demolish...
Noor Elahi Vs. Abdul Gaffar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-1980
Reported in: ILR1981Delhi228; 1982RLR192
Sultan Singh, J.(1) (ORAL). This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 4th January, 1972 in R.S.A. No. 52 of 1969. It has arisen out of a suit filed by the Respondent Sheikh Abdul Gaffar against the appellant Noor Elahi praying for ejectment of the latter and for recovery of arrears of rent. The trial court decreed the suit. The first appeal filed before the Additional Senior Sub Judge and the second appeal filed in this Court were dismissed. (2) The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit praying for the ejectment of the appellant Noor Elahi from the suit plot of land and for recovery of Rs. 115.62 on account of arrears of rent for three years ending 31st December, 1965. The plaintiff alleged that he was the owner of the suit plot, that the appellant-defenda,nt was in occupation of the plot as a tenant on behalf of the plaintiff at a monthly rent of Rs. 3.12 P, that a sum of Rs. 115.62 as arrears of rent was due, that...
Smt. Ganga Devi and ors. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-1980
Reported in: ILR1980Delhi360
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. This is an unfortunate case of a young man of 23 years who was working in the C.P.W.D. at a salary of Rs. 120/- per month and was killed in a road accident. The deceased Hira Ballabh was killed by bus No. DLP 138 at 8 A.M. on 3rd August, 1965 near the D.T.U. bus stand in front of Safdarjung Aerodrome. The bus was proceeding from Mehrauli to Connaught Place at the time when the accident took place. The deceased left behind appellant No. 1, his widow and appellants Nos. 2 and 3, who were his parents.2. The evidence on record, and as believed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, shows that the deceased was standing near the electric pole adjacent to the aforesaid D.T.U. bus stand. The bus in question stopped at the bus stop and some passengers got down and one or two entered the bus. According to P.W. 8 Krishan Lal, Constable No. 221, who was on duty at that place on that day and was an eye witness to the accident, the driver thereafter started the bus at a fast speed....
Jagdish Pershad Vs. Phoolwati Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-1980
Reported in: 17(1980)DLT446; 1980RLR367
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) The question referred to the Division Bench is whether the Controller has power to extend the period of limitation of 15 days prescribed in the Third Schedule to the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (the Act), for obtaining leave to contest the application for eviction filed by the landlord against the tenant on the ground specified in clause (e) of the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 14 or under Section 14A thereof either by invoking Section 5 read with Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963 or otherwise. The respondent landlady filed a petition for eviction against the petitioner-tenant under clause (e) of Sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Act. Such an application is governed by the expeditious procedure laid down in. Section 25B of the Act. As required by Section 25B(4) the summons to the tenant was issued in the form Specified in the Third Schedule. The tenant was informed thereby that 'You are hereby summoned to appear before the Controller within fi...
Satinder Lal Gupta Vs. Swarna Lata Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-1980
Reported in: 18(1980)DLT15; 1980RLR536
A.B. Rohatgi, J. (1) This is a husband's appeal from the decree of divorce dated September 18, 1978. (2) The parties were married on May 1, 1969. Both come from well- to-do families. There are two children of the marriage. A son was born on July 9, 1970 and a daughter on October 30, 1971. The husband is 34 years of age and the wife 29. (3) On July 15, 1977 the wife petitioned for divorce on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act (the Act). The real gravement of the wife's complaint was that the husband is a drunkard and by reason of and in consequence of drinking habits cruel to her. (4) The wife made three complaints against the husband-(1) drunkenness, (2) beating and (3) suspicious nature. In her evidence she deposed that the husband drank like a fish. The particular concomitant of husband's drunkenness was his habit of beating the wife whenever she remonstrated with him that he should give up drinking. The cause of unhappiness was drunkenness. The w...
The Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uo ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-1980
Reported in: 1980CENCUS459D
ORDERV.S. Deshpande, C.J.1. The petitioner manufacturers cloth and rayon yarn, etc. Each rayon spinning machine has got 132 individual positions. Each position is fitted with a pot motor and a pot in which the yarn is collected and given the required twist. A rayon pot spinning machine cannot function without pot motors. Pot motors have been given a special shape and design for the purpose of collecting yarn and giving a twist to it on the spinning machine. Pot motors have been given a very special shape for accommodating 132 such pot motors on each spinning frame in between Coagulation Trough and Spray Collection Troughs. Spindle of these pot motors is specially constructed to give positive movement of 7600 r.p.m. Such or like pot motors are not produced or manufactured in India. These pot motors are essential integral component parts of the spinning machines and these pot motors cannot be used outside and rayon spinning machines.2. The petitioner imported these pot motors during the ...
Siddhartha Publications (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delh ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-1980
Reported in: [1981]129ITR603(Delhi)
S. Ranganathan, J.1. This is a reference under s. 256(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961. The reference is at the instance of the assessed, M/s. Siddhartha Publications (P.) Ltd., which is now under compulsory winding-up proceedings in this court and is represented by the official liquidator. The reference relates to the assessment year 1963-64 for which the relevant previous year was the calendar year 1962. 2. The assessed is a private limited company and was publishing an English magazine, 'Thought'. The assessed approached an organisation known as 'Worldwide Partnership' (for solidarity with Africa, Asia and Latin America) with its headquarters at Bonn for some financial assistance. In a letter dated October 1, 1962, addressed to the above organisation the assessed explained that the little magazine run by it suffered from indifferent quality primarily because it was unable to pay adequately to the writers. It was pointed out that the assessed was keen to give a brighter look to the magazine...
Sant Ram Vs. Delhi State, G.R. Mittal Metropolitan Magistrate
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-05-1980
Reported in: 17(1980)DLT490
Yogeshwar Dayal, J. (1) The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code for quashing criminal proceedings pending against him under Sections 506 and 507 of the Indian Penal Code. The petition has proceeded on- the basis that the said criminal proceedings on F.I.R. No. 629/75 registered .with the Police Station Subzi Mandi Delhi, are illegal because offences under Sections 506/507 of the Indian Penal Code are not cognizable. Some allegations have been made in the petition concerning some Judicial Officers, but it is unnecessary to repeat them in the judgment because they are of little relevance to the point urged.(2) A notice was issued to the Delhi administration to show cause why the petition should not be admitted and a counter-affidavit has been filed which states the facts. The said reply shows that the petitioner had filed a complaint under Section 219 of the Indian Penal Code...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »