Delhi Court May 1982 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.
Rajinder Nath Sharma and ors. Vs. Rani Chander Kanta and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Delhi584; 22(1982)DLT301
M.L. Jain, J. (1) The facts of this appeal are that one Raja Fateh Singh of Sheikhpura (Pakistan)) who died sometime in 1930, left extensive properties in New Delhi, Karnal Simla, Haridwar and Varansi. He left behind two widows and son Raja Dhian Singh by Rani Mistri Devi. Raja Dhian Singh died on February 1, 1957. He left three widows and children from all of them. In a litigation between the heirs of Raja Fateh Singh, by decrees awarded by the Commercial Sub-Judge Delhi on April 18, 1962 and August 24, 1962, in Suit No 417 of 1959, another widow of Raja Fateh Singh, Rani Kripa Devi was awarded 1/10 share in the properties in dispute. It is alleged that Rani Kripa Devi executed a Will (Ex. P-l) on 2-6-1967 and presented it for registration on 6-6-1967. It was registered on 7-6-1967 by Hari Ghand Gaur (Public Witness 2). By the said Will she purports to have bequeathed her share in favor of four sons of her brother Shankar Lal and a servant S.ldhu Singh who has been in faithful service...
Bimal Chandra Sen Vs. Kamla Mathur and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-1982
Reported in: 1983CriLJ495; 22(1982)DLT33; 1982RLR553
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J.(1) The Facts : The plaintiff, Dr. Bimal Chandra Sen, owns property No. 4405 in Darya Ganj, Delhi. He says that he gave a portion of his property on lease and license to one Mrs. Kamla Mathur wife of Shri Rama Shankar Mathur. The plaintiff alleges that Mrs. Mathur was making illegal construction in the property. On 6-4-1981 he brought a suit in the court of the subordinate judge, Mr. S. N. Gupta, for permanent injunction restraining Mrs. Mathur, her servants and agents, from carrying on any construction activities in the property. In. the suit the plaintiff made an application for temporary injunction under Order 39 rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The subordinate judge granted a temporary injunction against the defendant, her agents and servants.. on 6-4-1981. On 6-6-81 he modified the injunction order. From this order they, the plaintiff and the defendants, appealed to the court of the senior sub judge. Those appeals were dismissed.(2) Now the pla...
Nanak Chand and ors. Vs. Chander Kishore and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-24-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Delhi520; 22(1982)DLT11
M.L. Jain, J. (1) This appeal and cross-objections are directed against the judgment of the learned single Judge, of December 15, 1976, in a suit for partition of joint Hindu family properties and for rendition of accounts filed by the sons against their father. (2) In order to understand the genesis of the case, let us commence with the geneology : Mool Chand Radha Kishan Banarsi Das (died on 19-10-1949) Nanak Chand (Adopted on 29-3-1927 at the age of 121/2 years) (defendant (1) appellant) Raj Rani (wife) Bimla Devi (wife) (died on 14-9-1949) (married on 1-7-52) (defendant 5 appellant). Chander Ravinder Ramesh Santosh Usha Shashi Kishore Kishore Kumar (Deft-2 Rani Prabha (planti- (pltf- (Pltf respt) (Deft-3 (deft-4 ff-res- respt.) respt.) (un- respt) respt) pondent) married) (un- (married) married) Yogesh Kumar Tarun Kumar (Deft-6- (Deft-7- appellant) appellant The plaintiffs, the sons of Nanak Chand, appellant, born of Raj Rani, served a notice (Ex. D1/10), on him on 17-5-1963 intima...
Commissioner of Income-tax Delhi Vs. Blaze Advertising (Delhi) (P.) Lt ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-21-1982
Reported in: (1982)30CTR(Del)331; [1983]143ITR421(Delhi)
D.K. Kapur J. 1. The Department has sought a reference under s. 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, regarding the following question : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally correct in allowing the expenditure of Rs. 18,823 incurred prior to the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1974-75, in computing the taxable income for the assessment year 1974-75 ?' 2. The Tribunal refused to refer the question on the ground that a pure finding of fact was involved. The ground on which the reference has been refused does not appear to be a valid one, because the question is certainly not a factual one. 3. In order to understand the controversy, it may be mentioned that the company was incorporated on April 22, 1972, and closed its accounts for the first time on June 30, 1973. The accounting period was, thereforee, April 22, 1972, to June 31, 1973, as far the company's accounts were concerned. The ITO acted on the basis that the company was to ...
Nawal Bihari Lal Goel Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-v
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-21-1982
Reported in: (1983)32CTR(Del)287; [1983]140ITR979(Delhi)
D.K. Kapur, J.1. There are four applications under s. 256(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961, before the court. They are I.T.Cs. Nos. 39 of 1980 and 75 to 77 of 1980. These relate to the assessment years 1963-64, 1964-65, 1966-76 and 1967-68. The four appeals out of these references were decided together by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal on January 15, 1979. The assessed then filed four applications under s. 256(1) of the Act before the Tribunal seeking a reference concerning the following questions: '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law holding that the assessed was not engaged in genuine money-lending business 2. Whether there was any evidence before the Tribunal to hold that the assessed did not carry on any money-lending business and 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in disregarding the solemn affirmation made by the assessed before the authorities and in holding that he ...
Fazilka Electric Supply Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-21-1982
Reported in: (1983)36CTR(Del)355; ILR1983Delhi708; [1983]143ITR551(Delhi)
S. Ranganathan, J. (1) This income-tax reference raises a basic question relating to the concept of accrual of income in the context of the interest payable on the amount of compensation determined in acquisition cases. It arises out of the assessment of the Fazilka Electric Supply Co. Ltd. for the assessment year 1963-64 for which the relevant previous year ended on 31-3-1963.(2) The assesses company was a licensee under the Punjab Electricity Supply Act. This business was taken over by the Government of Punjab on 23-7-1949 in pursuance of proceedings under Section 7(1) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910. These proceedings had started with the issue of a letter by the Secretary B to the. Government of Punjab dated 13-3-1947 by Which he gave notice to the assessed company that the Punjab Government had decided to purchase the electricity supply undertaking of the assessed by exercising the option given in clause 9(1) of the license granted to the assessed read with Section 7(2) of the...
Union of India, Etc. Vs. Nand Kishore
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-21-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Delhi462; 22(1982)DLT251
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J.(1) In this letters patent appeal an application was made to us on 21st January, 1982 for an early hearing of the appeal. It was stated that the land in question is required for widening the road in connection with the Asiads' 82 and was immediately needed for a public purpose. We agreed to hear the appeal, as we generally do in such cases. We have now heard counsel for the parties. We give our decision immediately.(2) The short question in this appeal is whether the Government can change the purpose of acquisition of the land and acquire it for a purpose other than that declared by it under section 6(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act).(3) These are the facts. On 4th May, 1960 the appellant, Union of India, issued a notification under sections 4, 6 and 17 of the Act in respect of a plot of land measuring 12 bighas 2 bids was in Khasra No. 68 situated in village Kilokari. The notification stated that the land was required for a public purpose, namely,...
Ashoka Cement Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-21-1982
Reported in: 22(1982)DLT363; 1982(3)DRJ393; 1982RLR629
H.L. Anand, J. (1) The Union of india seekstay u/s. 34 of the Arbitration Act of three suits filed under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure against them for recovery of sales-tax livable on the freight component Of sale price for cement supplied under the terms of the Cement Control- Order, 1967 and in accordance with the D.G.S & D.Rate Contract. Plaintiffs -resist the application? for stay on the ground that the claim against the Union is fully reinforced by adecision of the Supreme Court of India in course whereof the highest Court has unequivocally upheld the tight of sellers in identical circumstances to the amount and expressed their sense of deep concern that the Union should have made 'an attempt to resist the claim on the basis of pure technicalities. It is, however, riot disputed that the contract for the supply of material contained an arbitration clause, which is wide enongh in its scope, to take in the dispute between the parties.(2) It appears that the contracts enter...
K.N. Mehta Vs. Director of Enforcement and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-20-1982
Reported in: [1985]57CompCas820(Delhi); 1982CriLJ1916; 1985(5)ECC286; ILR1982Delhi712; 1982RLR644
Charanjit Talwar, J. 1. These are two connected appeals filed under s. 54 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (herein called 'the Act'), challenging the legality of order passed on January 27, 1975, by the Foreign Exchange Regulation Appellate Board (herein called 'the Board') upholding the finding of the Director of Enforcement that Mr. K. N. Mehta (appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 120 of 1975) and his wife, Mrs. Saraswati Mehta (appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 121 of 1975), were guilty of contravening the provisions of the Act. The imposition of penalty amounts on different counts is thus sought to be set aside. 2. The Director of Enforcement had originally issued 11 show-cause notices to Mr. Mehta and six show-cause notice to Mrs. Saraswati Mehta for having dealt in foreign exchange in contravention of various provisions of the Act. After adjudication, Mrs. Mehta was found guilty of one charge only; Mrs. Mehta, however, was found guilty in respect of the charges covered un...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Delhi-i Vs. Smt. Promila Bali
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-20-1982
Reported in: (1983)34CTR(Del)374; [1983]141ITR942(Delhi)
Kapur, J.1. In this case, there are a number of questions raised for different years. In all four applications under s. 27(3) of the W.T. Act, 1957, have been filed by the Commissioner of wealth tax, Delhi I, relating to the assessment years 1971 72 to 1974-75. The following proposed question is common to all the four years : 'whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified and correct in holding that the value of the plot on the relevant valuation date was Rs. 21,200 which is the premium paid by the assessed, following the decision of the Tribunal dated May 10, 1976, in W.T.A. Nos. 592 to 594/74-75 in the case of Miss Beneeta Seth, Which has been agitated by the department in reference application under section 27(3) of the wealth tax Act ?' 2. The following question is said to arise in relation to three of the assessment years : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in fixing the value of the str...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »