Delhi Court May 1980 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1980 Page 3 of about 43 results (0.021 seconds)Budhwant Kaur Vs. Som Nath
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 18(1980)DLT249; 1981(2)DRJ53; 1980RLR686
Harish Chandra, J.(1) Appellant had sued for eviction claiming that she needed more accommodation for her family consisting of self, husband, 4 grown-up sons and 2 married daughters. Controller allowed the petition. Tenant appealed to Tribunal who held that appellant had 7 rooms and her maximum requirement was of 5 rooms. She and husband required one room, 2 married sons required 2 rooms, 2 other sons required one room and the unmarried daughters needed one room. Tribunal on the finding that appellant had sufficient accommodation accepted the appeal. Landlady appealed to High Court. During the pendency of appeal, tenant made an application that appellant had died and 2 unmarried daughters had been married and thus need had become less. In reply it was urged that one son has been married and the need had not become less] Judgment para 8 onwards is : (2) Counsel for the appellant has vehemently attacked the finding of the Tribunal in the impugned judgment about the availability of suitab...
Tag this Judgment!Chemicals and Fibres of India Limited Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1984(16)ELT113(Del)
Sachar, J. 1. This order will dispose of C.W. 883/78 & 1079/79. We take the facts from the Civil Writ Petition No. 883/78. It was conceded by both the counsels that our decision in this writ petition will also govern the decision in the order writ petition. 2. This petition relates to the claim of the petitioner company to a drawback of Rs. 7,15,779.60 being the amount of Customs duty paid by it for import of Dimethyl Terepthalate (shortly to be called the DMT) under the Customs and Central Excise Drawback Rules, 1971 (hereinafter to be called the 1971 Rules) which has been rejected by the respondents/Union of India, Ministry of Finance. 3. The petitioner is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture of polyester staple fibre which is sold under the name of trade mark 'Teren'. In April, 1975 the petitioners obtained an order for export of yarn made from a blend of polyester staple fibre. DMT is subjected to payment of Customs duty. The petitioner at one time were able to persu...
Tag this Judgment!New India Industrial Corporation Ltd. Vs. Union of India, Etc.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1980Delhi277; ILR1980Delhi940
S.B. Wad, J.(1) This judgment will also dispose of Civil Writ Nos. 1301 to 1316 of 1979, as they-raise common question of law. For the sake of convenience I will take the facts as stated in Civil -Writ No. 1300 of 1979. (2) On July 3, 1979 the Delhi Administration issued the impugned notification (Annexure-I) under section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 read with the Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture & Irrigation (Department of Food) G.S.R. 800, dated June 9, 1978. This notification is called Delhi Ice Control Order, 1979. The order inter-alia provides for fixation of price, chargeable for the sale of ice in Delhi. It also gives the Administration a power of inspection, entry search and seizure. The petitioner challenge the legality and the constitutionality of this order. The main grounds of attack are : (I)Ice is not 'food' and, thereforee, its sale and pricing cannot be regulated by Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 read withG.S.R. 800 of June 9, ...
Tag this Judgment!Tikkan Lal Sewa Ram Vs. Seth Jiwan Dass Des Raj and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 18(1980)DLT248; 1980RLR681
S.B. Wad, J. (1) This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order of the Addl. District Judge, Delhi, dismissing the petitioner application under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act. (2) Respondent No.1I was, a member of Delhi Hindustani Mercantile Association. Petitioner used to purchase cloth from him on credit basis against the 'Beejhaks' (bills) at the time of each purchase. One of the terms mentioned on the 'Beejhaks' was 'Decision on the mutual disputes would be made by Delhi Hindustani Mercantile Association or through Judge or Tribunals established by them (ie. the Delhi Hindustani Mercantile Association) as Arbitrators, which would be binding'. The dispute having arisen, the Arbitrators were appointed by the Association, who rendered their award. The petitioner contended that there was no valid arbitration agreement and no agreement to refer the dispute to Arbitrators. (3) Before the learned Additional District Judge, the petitioner conceded that he had received the 'B...
Tag this Judgment!Randhir Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1980CriLJ1379; 18(1980)DLT172
Prithvi Raj, J.(1) This is an appeal by Randhir Singh, aged 40 years, an agriculturist of Village Poolh Kalan, Delhi. He has been convicted by Shri R. P. Gupta, Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, by his judgment passed on October 25, 1979, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of his wife Shrimati Bhagwani, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment fur life and a fine of Rs. 20LO.00 , in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year. The appellant has also been convicted for an offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code for destroying the evidence of crime by burning the dead body of Smt. Bhagwani, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years and a fine of Rs. 500.00 . in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months.(2) The facts leading to the registration of the case are as follows. On December 23, 1978, at about 11 p.m. an anonymous telephonic call was received at Police...
Tag this Judgment!NaraIn Dutt Jhamb Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: ILR1980Delhi1339
M.L. Jain, J.(1) This order will dispose of nine revision petitions (Cr Revisions Nos. 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200 and 201 of 1977).(2) The accused Narain Dutt Jhamb applied to the Delhi Municipal Corporation for sanction for construction of a Cinema house on his plot in Shahdara. He alleged that he got the requisite sanction but the Corporation later on disclaimed its sanction. He filed a writ petition No. 668D/63 in this Court and obtained a writ from a Single Judge on December 15, 1972. The Corporation has filed an L. P. A. No. 63/73 against the writ which is still pending. He then constituted a partnership firm for running the Cinema in the name of M/s. N. D. Jhamb and co. on December 26, 1972. The partners are N. D. Jhamb and two women who are perhaps his daughters-in-law. The construction appears to have begun on April 21, 1973. After he completed the construction, he applied on September 15, 1975 for a completion certificate as required by Section 346 of the Delhi Mun...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Suri Vs. Custodian General of Evacuee Property and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 18(1980)DLT454
Rajindar Sachar, J.(1) This is Letters Patent Appeal against the order of the learned single judge by which he dismissed the writ petition and held that the right to receive royalty vested in the Custodian on the migration of the evacuee. (2) The predecessor in interest of the appellant, by an agreement between him and one Shri D. D. Dhawan and Sheikh Mohd. Abdula who were the co-authors of a book called 'New Method metriculation Geometry' excuted in 1937 was given the publishing and selling rights of the book. The publisher also agreed to pay royalty at 2l/o on the first issue and 25% on the subsequent editions of the book. The agreement was signed in Lahore where one of the coauthors Shri D.D. Dhawan was residing. Sheikh Mohd. Abdula was residing in Delhi. It is a common case that Sheikh. Mohd. Abdula left Delhi as a result of partition in 1947 and is undoubtedly an evacuee, 10th Edition of the book was published in Lahore in May, 1949. (3) On 13.2.1960 the Assistant Custodian passed...
Tag this Judgment!Banarjsi Dass (Deceased) Through Lrs. and ors. Vs. Meva Devi
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 18(1980)DLT36a; ILR1980Delhi925; 1980RLR440
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J. (1) This is an appeal from the order of the rent control tribunal dated February 21, 1978.(2) Kanwar Hira Lal and Banarsi Dass were the sons of Bhola Nath. These two brothers had taken on rent a shop in main bazar Mehrauli. On September 30, 1974 their landlady, Smt. Mewa Devi, brought an application for ejectment against them. The sole ground of eviction was that the tenants had defaulted in the payment of rent a second time. It was alleged that inspire of notice of demand dated July Ii, 1974 the tenants did riot pay Rs. 152.50 on account of arrears of rent from November 7, 1973 to September 17, 1974 at the rat,e of Rs. 14.30 per month.(3) Earlier too a notice dated December 6, 1971 was served on the tenants. And when they did not pay rent an application for eviction was filed against them on July 31, 1972. In those proceedings the additional controller allowed them to deposit the rent and thus gave .them the benefit of section 14(2) of the Delhi Rent Central A...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [1982]136ITR81(Delhi)
S. Ranganathan, J.1. All these references raise the question whether the Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society (which is the respondent in all these matters) is eligible for exemption under s. 4(3)(i) of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, and its successor provision, s. 11 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Since the facts and question of law are common, it will be convenient to dispose of all the references by common order. 2. The references relate to the assessment years 1960-61 to 1971-72, the relevant previous year for each of the assessment years being the preceding calendar year. 3. The respondent-assessed is a society registered under the Companies Act on October 12, 1951. The objects of the society have been set out in para. 3 of its memorandum of association and run as follow : '3(a) To act as a central organization primarily of the Press of India, and of any other country in Asia which desires to associate itself with the society. (b) To promote and safeguard the business interests of its members ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. the Indian and Eastern Newspaper Societ ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: ILR1980Delhi874; [1982]137ITR81(Delhi)
S. Ranganathan, J. (1) All these references raise the question whether the Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society (which is the respondent in all these matters) is eligible for exemption under Section 4(3) (i) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 aid its successor provision Section Ii of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Since the facts and question of law are common, it will be convenient to dispose of all the references by a common order.(2) The references relate to the assessment years 1960-61 to 1971-72, the relevant previous year for each of the assessment years being the preceding calendar year.(3) The respondent assessed is a society registered under the Companies Act on 12-10-1951. The objects of the Society have been set out in para 3 of its Memorandum of Association and run as follows:'3(a) To act as a Central organization primarily of the Press of India, and of any other country in Asia, which desires to associate itself with the Society. (B)To promote and 'safeguard the business interest...
Tag this Judgment!