Delhi Court February 1982 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds - plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Jagdish Pershad Vs. Hardayail Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Delhi298; 21(1982)DLT310; 1982(3)DRJ184; 1982RLR283
Sultan Singh, J.(1) This revision petition challenges the judgment and order dated 19th January, 1980 of the Additional Controller, Delhi dismissing the petitioner's application for leave to amend the eviction application. Briefly the facts are that the petitioner-landlord filed an application for eviction of the respondent-tenant under Section 14(l)(c)of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on 21st January, 1977. On an application by the respondent he was granted leave to contest. He filed the written statement. The landlord examined his evidence and the respondent also examined most of his evidence. On 30th August, 1979 the petitioner made an application under Order 6 rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') seeking leave to amend the eviction petition by adding a ground of eviction under Section 14(1)(h) of the Act alleging that the tenant has now acquired vacant possession of the residence at C-24, Ashok Vihar...
Union of India Vs. Syed Shah Nasir Hussain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Delhi300; 1982(3)DRJ187; ILR1982Delhi969; 1982RLR232
A.B. Rohatgi, J. (1) This Letters Patent Appeal arises out of a suit for permanent injunction brought by Sajjadaushin and mutawalli of Dargah Hazrat Sheikh Mohd. Chisti against the Union of India in 1959. The plaintiff's case was that there is a graveyard, well and trees attached to the dargah with an area of about 806/1/3 sq .yards which is a part of khasra No. 417. It was claimed by the plaintiff that be and his predecessor in interest have been in possession of the property for the last 300 years. The plaint recites about an old litigation. On November 5, 1938, the Governor-General-in Council brought a suit (Suit No. 463 of 1938) forpossessionofSbighas-8 bids was of this property against the plaintiff's grand father, Pir Karar Hussain.(2) In that suit a decree was passed by consent of parties on March 1 1. 1939, which provided that a perpetual lease free of rent would be granted in favor of sajjadaiiashin & mutwali wilh respect to the dargah, mosque, graveyard and well. As regards t...
Eastern Linkers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dina Nath Sodhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-1982
Reported in: [1984]55CompCas462(Delhi); 1982(3)DRJ239
Sachar, J. 1. This is an appeal by the company against the order of the learned single judge holding that it was just and equitable to wind up the company and so ordering accordingly. Similar appeals have also been filed by Bail (being Company Appeal No. 30/1980), who was one of the directors of the company; another appeal (being Company Appeal No. 9/1980) has also been filed on behalf of the directors. As most of the points are common, this judgment will also dispose of those appeals excepting where separate order is given with reference to the points arising in those appeals. 2. It may be mentioned that broadly the shareholders are divided into two groups known as Bali group (appellant) and Sodhi group (respondent) who had moved the application for winding up the company. 3. The company was incorporated on May 14, 1949, with an authorised capital of Rs. 5 lakhs divided into one thousand ordinary shares of Rs. 100 and 200 cumulative preference shares of Rs. 2,000 each. The memorandum ...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. H.S. Ahuja
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-1982
Reported in: [1982]136ITR94(Delhi); 1982RLR219
D.K. Kapur, J.(1) There are six petitions moved by the Commissioner of Wealth, tax, Delhi-1, Delhi, seeking a reference to this Court u/s 27(3) of the Wealth-lax Act 1957, which relate to the assessment years 1971-72 to 1976-77. There was a consolidated order of the Tribunal for these six assessment years in appeal and a common order disallowing an application u/s 27(1) of the Act. The question of law sought to be referred to this Court is as follows : 'WHETHERon the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified and correct in law in upholding the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner that the outstanding fees on the relevant valuation date were not liable to be included in the total wealth of the assessed ?'(2) We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, but the respondent has not appeared in spite of proper service. The facts show that the respondent-assessed is a Chartered Accountant whose wealth-tax assessment was made for the six years und...
Krishan Gopal Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-11-1982
Reported in: 22(1982)DLT73
S. Ranganathan, J. (1) The petitioner Krishan Gopal is the owner of a building bearing municipal No. 2897-99 in Ward No. Vi, Bazar Sirkiwalan, Lal Kuan Bazar, Delhi. He applied for and obtained a sanction for certain constructions in the above premises. After the building was complete he applied for a completion certificate under Section 346 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and this was duly granted to him on 27th January, 1969. (2) According to the respondents, after the completion certificate was granted, the petitioner started some further construction which was not authorised because no sanction had been obtained in respect thereof. According to the respondents, a notice was issued to the petitioner dated 19-2-1969 (but signed by the Zonal Engineer on 18-2-1969) pointing out to him that he had raised unauthorised construction without the municipal sanction or contrary to the terms and conditions of such sanction and calling upon him to s...
indu Gupta Vs. Rajeshwar Pershad
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-10-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Delhi344; 1982(3)DRJ172; 1982RLR216
Charanjit Talwar, J. (1) This is an appeal under section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act challenging the judgment and decree passed, on March 20, 1980 by Shri P.L. Single, Additional District Judge, Delhi dissolving the marriage of the parties herein under section 13(l)(b) of the Act on the ground that the appellant-wife had deserted her husband for a continuous period of more than two years immediately preceeding the presentation of the petition by the husband.(2) The parties were married in Delhi on 11th May, 1971, in accordance with Hindu Rites. They were residing at 11/142, Biria New Line, Kamla Nagar, New Delhi, in a quarter allotted to the husband's father where in all 12 other members of the family were also living. The parties led a happy married life for about 6/7 months in that house consisting of one room and a varandah. Thereafter, it is the husband's case that his wife wanted him to break away from his parents and other members of the family and live separately. As he is the ...
Surinder Kumar Grover Vs. the State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-1982
Reported in: 1982CriLJ922; 21(1982)DLT230; 1982(3)DRJ161; ILR1982Delhi948; 1982RLR668
D.K. Kapur, J. 1. This petition under Arts. 226, 14 and 21 of the Constitution and also S. 482 of the Cr.P.C. was submitted to this Court from Jail. The petitioner is undergoing imprisonment for life after conviction for an offence under S. 302, Penal Code but his appeal is pending in this High Court. He was treated as a better class i.e. B Class Prisoner, but he has been deprived of these better class facilities for a period of three months as a result of an order passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Delhi, on November 20, 1981. It is against that order that the present petition has been moved. 2. We gave a show cause notice to the State and after considering the reply affidavits and other material brought before us, we issued Rule D.B. and proceeded to hear the learned Standing Counsel. 3. The question we have to decide is whether the petitioner can be deprived of the facilities in the manner adopted in the present case, and we have even to see whether the order is contrary to la...
All India Institute of Medical Sciences Vs. American Refrigeration Co. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Delhi275; 21(1982)DLT352; 1982(3)DRJ287
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J. (1) The appellant. All India Institute of Medical Sciences at New Delhi, invited tenders for 'the supply and installation of air-conditioning plant, air handling units, whether makers, fan coil units, pipelines and other accessories in the main plant room, ward block, paying bed wards etc.' The respondent M/s American Refrigeration Company Limited, submitted a tender. Their tender was accepted. On November 21, 1968, a formal agreement was executed between the parties. In their letter dated April 24, 1967, M/s American Refrigeration Company (whom I shall call the contractor' because in the agreement they are so described) had written to the Institute that 'OURprices are exclusive of sales tax, octroi or any other tax which shall be charged extra as applicable at the time of the delivery.'(2) It is not in dispute that this letter formed a part of the contract. The contractor indicated separately the sales tax payable by the Institute. It was also mentioned that t...
Pushpa Talwar Vs. A.N. Kapoor
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-1982
Reported in: 21(1982)DLT235; 1982RLR223
Sultan Singh, J. (1) The appellant-landlady, in this second appeal under Section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') challenges the judgment and order of the Rent Control Tribunal, dated 18th November, 1978 confirming the order, dated 29th September, 1976 of the Additional Controller, dismissing her application for eviction of the respondent tenant on the ground of personal bona fide requirement mentioned in Section 14(1)(e)oftheAct. The question for decision is : Whether the premises in question were let for residential purposes? (2) To determine the purpose of letting, it is necessary to narrate certain facts. Shri Ram Narain Virmani, father of the appellant, had constructed flats at 24, Mall Road, Delhi in 1960. He let out two flats in the said building on 1st October, 1961 to the respondent. In her letter dated 7th October, 1961, the respondent wrote, 'We agree to use house for residential purposes of myself and foreign students'. On 18th A...
Wealth-tax Officer Vs. Sunil Lamba
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1982
Reported in: (1982)1ITD916(Delhi)
1. This bunch of appeals relating to four assessment years preferred by the revenue against consolidated order dated 10-9-1980 of the AAC was heard together.2. ASSESSMENT YEAR 1973-74-31-3-1973 is the corresponding valuation date. The assessee is an individual. The assessment was completed by the WTO as per order dated 30-12-1978 determining net wealth at Rs. 22,566.3. The assessee had one-half share in a house situate at No. 29, Hanuman Road, New Delhi. He had purchased the said house jointly with one Smt. Meena on 25-5-1972. Cost price of the assessee's one-half share in the said asset came to Rs. 1,09,140. That sum had been borrowed by the assessee from a certain firm in which he was a partner.In the assessment completed by the WTO, Rs. 1,09,140, i.e., the declared estimated value of the assessee's one-half share, was accepted as correct value. Benefit of exemption under Section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ("the Act"), was given to the assessee to the extent of Rs. 1 lakh....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »