Delhi Court July 1984 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.
K.B. Rohetgi Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-28-1984
Reported in: (1984)10ITD714(Delhi)
1. Shri Gulzari Mal died on 12-3-1981, leaving behind four sons. One son and wife of Gulzari Mal had predeceased him. Gulzari Mal headed a joint family whose assets were of Rs. 2,48,331.2. The first controversy before us is regarding the aggregation made by the Assistant Controller of five-sixths share of the deceased's five lineal descendants in the joint family estate. Thus, the Assistant Controller, after working out the deceased's one-sixth share in the estate at Rs. 41,388, aggregated five-sixths of the lineal descendants' shares in the joint family at Rs. 2,05,915.3. The accountable person contended that the lineal descendants' shares could not be aggregated. The Assistant Controller rejected this contention. The Appellate Controller upheld the Assistant Controller's order on this point after noting that a large number of High Courts had taken the view that the lineal descendants' shares were aggregable under Section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ('the Act') and the deci...
income-tax Officer Vs. S.A. Hareford
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-28-1984
Reported in: (1985)11ITD569(Delhi)
1. Since the facts of the cases involved in these appeals, which have been preferred by the revenue, are identical and since common grounds have been raised in all the appeals and further we have been addressed in one set by both the parties, and in view of the fact that a common paper-book has been placed on our file for and on behalf of all the assessees, these appeals as of necessity and for the sake of convenience are being disposed of by this common order.2. The background facts of the cases are that the assessments in all the cases and for all the years under appeal have been made on the Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC), as agent of non-resident expatriate technicians of some foreign companies deputed by those foreign companies to work with the ONGC for the purposes of carrying on various jobs relating to the drilling of off-shores/coasts and wells. The persons, for whom the ONGC has been assessed as agent, have rendered services under an agreement and the ONGC filed return...
Diamond Marble Mfg. Co. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-1984
Reported in: (1987)(31)ELT130TriDel
1. The revision petition preferred to the Government by M/s. Diamond Marbles Mfg. Company, Howrah has been received on transfer under Section 35-P of the Central Excises & Salt Act and. is being disposed of as an appeal under this order.2. Under his order dated 31-12-1978 the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta, held that six or more workers were employed by the appellant in its factory and hence, the appellant was not entitled to the benefits under notification No. 90/76, dated 16-3-1976. On that conclusion he imposed a penalty of Rs. 35,000/- and also demanded duty amounting to Rs. 31,162.50 ps. relating to the period 21-10-1976 to 20-1-1977. On an appeal by the appellant against the said order the Central Board of Excise & Customs by order dated 29-5-1980 confirmed the said order except to the extent of reducing the penalty to Rs. 20,000/-. It is against the said order dated 29-5-1980 that the revision petition had been preferred to the Government.3. Shri M. Ganesan, Advo...
Ashok Kumar Vs. Delhi Gymkhana Club
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-1984
Reported in: 1984(7)DRJ183
Yogeshwar Dayal, J.(1) This writ petition has been filed by Sh. Ashok Kumar) who was Messing Clerk in the Delhi Gymkhana Club Limited, Delhi. His services were terminated with effect from 16th August, 1976 by the Club, respondent No. 1. He raised an industrial dispute and the same was referred to the Presiding Officer of Labour Court as case No.1.C.I.D. No. 278 of 1979. The learned Labour Court by the impugned award dated 23rd March, 1982 held that the termination of the services of the petitioner was illegal and unjustified and has been entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service. Regarding the back wages, the learned Labour Court took the view that unless and until the workman had stated in examnat:ion -inchief that he was not earning during the period of his termination; his claim for back wages must tail. The learned Presiding Officer felt that the burden in such cases was on the employee seeking back wages. It is this part of the award, which has been challenged by the em...
S.J. Choudhary Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1984
Reported in: 1984(2)Crimes487
ORDER1. Col. S. J. Choudhary is at present being tried in the Court of Shri Mahesh Chandra, Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi, under S. 302, I.P.C. for the alleged murder of Krishan Sikand, a resident of 98 Sunder Nagar, New Delhi. The murder was stated to have been committed in a blast which took place on 2-10-1982 at the said residence of the deceased.2. The background is stated to be that Rani Choudhry widow of late Pritam Singh, married the accused on 31-3-1971. At that time she had already two daughters with her from her deceased husband Pritam Singh. The new marriage, however, did not last for long, and sometime about the year 1976, Rani Choudhary left the accused and came to Delhi. Here she developed intimacy with Krishan Sikand and started living with him in his house at No. 98, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi. On 6-12-1979, she obtained a decree for divorce against the accused. This was ex parte. The accused feeling aggrieved, moved the High Court which allowed that to extent that ...
National Oil and Chemical Industries Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1984
Reported in: 1987(30)ELT674(Del)
1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the National Oil and Chemical Industries, the petitioners herein, have challenged the validity of the order dated 21st March 1978 of the respondent No. 2 and prayed for issuing a writ of mandamus with a direction the respondents to grant the replacement licenses against the three import licenses for the import of crude palm oil granted on 28th November 1977. 2. The relevant facts are these. The petitioners entered into a contract with M/s. B. S. Ahuja Company Pvt. Ltd., Singapore for purchase of 1100 metric tonnes of palm oil. The petitioners were granted three import licenses bearing Nos. P/A 1413329, P/A 1413330 and P/A 141331 on 28th November 1977 for the import of 1100 metric tonnes of palm oil. The contracted grade palm oil was dispatched by M/s. B. S. Ahuja Company by the vessel 'S. S. Katrina'. Unfortunately, the aforesaid vessel 'S. S. Katrina' sank in the Bay of Bengal on 6th February 1978. All the goods on bo...
Chand Krishan Bhalla Vs. Surinder Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1984
Reported in: 1984(7)DRJ189
Sultan Singh, J. (1) It has been observed again and again by the Supreme Court that the court should be liberal in allowing application for leave to amend the pleadings in Jai Jai Ram Manohar Lal v. National Building Material Supply, Gurgaon, : [1970]1SCR22 following observation has been made : 'RULES of procedure are intended to be a handmaid to the administration of justice. A party cannot be refused just relief merely because of some mistake negligence, inadvertence of even infraction of the rules of procedure. The court always gives leave to amend the pleading of a party, unless it is satisfied, that the party applying was acting mala fide, or that by his blunder, he had caused injury to his opponent which may not ' be compensated for by an order of costs. However, negligent or careless may have been the first omission, and however, late the proposed amendments, the amendment may be allowed if it can be made without injustice to the other side.'(2) M/S. Ganesh Trading Co. v. Moji R...
Pradeep Tyagi Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1984
Reported in: 1984(2)Crimes507; 1984RLR528
J.D. Jain, J.(1) The facts giving rise to this revision petition which is directed against order dated 26.18.83 of an Additional Sessions Judge setting aside the order of the S.D.M. dated 22.1.83 passed u/s 145(1) and 146(1), Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code), succinctly are that respondents 2 to 8 are sons of late Shri Bhagwan Dass. They are residents of village Chhawla and they owned land comprised in reconsolidation khata No. 84 situated within the revenue estate of the said village, jointly with S/Shri Pyare and Surte, sons of Shri Kanahiya, their share in the said land being 3/4th and the share of Pyare and Surte being 1/4th. Long back Pyare and Surte started residing in a village in District Rohtak and, thereforee, respondents 2 to 8 continued to be in cultivatory possession of the same. At the time of consolidation of holdings, the land allotted in lieu of the land comprised in khata No. 84 was split into two portions, one block having been allotted to respondents ...
Prahlad Rai Dalmia Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-1984
Reported in: AIR1986Delhi76; 26(1984)DLT331; 1984(7)DRJ226
Avadh Behari, J. (1) This is an appeal from the order of a learned single judge of this court dated March 31, 1981.(2) The short question in this appeal is whether Delhi courts have jurisdiction to try the suit filed by the appellant, M/s. Prahlad Rai Dalmia against the respondent Union of India, Dalmia filed a suit against the Union of India seeking declaration that the contract, namely, the Acceptance of Tender No. BTX-7/62707/364/PACD entered into between the parties was not a valid and a concluded contract. In paragraph 24 of the plaint the jurisdiction was sought to be conferred on the courts in Delhi by making the following averments: '24.That the Defendant Union of India have its principal office at the functions at New Delhi within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court.........'(3) This was tried as a preliminary issue. It was decided by the learned judge against Dalmia. He hold that Delhi courts have no jurisdiction to lry this suit. Consequently he ordered the pl...
P.R. Thakur Vs. J.P. Tyagi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-1984
Reported in: 1(1985)ACC140
S.B. Wad, J.1. Contempt proceedings were initiated on receipt of a report from Mr. P.R. Thakur, Presiding Officer, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. 'In the report it had been mentioned that complaints were being made to the Tribunal that recovery proceedings were not taking place of judgments which had been given and naturally the survivors, who were poor people, were being put to grave grief. He had, thereforee, asked for a report as to what steps had been taken for the recovery proceedings. But inspire of writing a number of letters and asking for report no reply had been received from the Collector. What really made Mr. Thakur in suggesting this step was that he was of the view that the three cases before him were only the tip of the large number of pending cases and this huge pendency was evidently defeating the whole purpose of the Act. We feel that the response by the Collector to the enquiry made by the Tribunal was not what it should have been considering that he was the execut...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »