Delhi Court August 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.
Onkar Nath Vs. Gaja Nand and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-02-1984
Reported in: 1984(7)DRJ293
N.N. Gowamy, J.(1) This order will also dispose of C.M.(M) No. 21 oF 1983. Both these petitions have been filed against the order dated 2-7-1982 passed by the executing court whereby the application of the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure was allowed to the extent that attachment warrants for attaching the property of the Judgment debtor were issued for compelling them to comply with the orders of the Court dated 28-5-1983. In civil revision by the decree-holder the grievance is that besides the attachment warrants for attaching the property the executing court should have also issued order for detaining the judgment debtor in civil prison and should further have issued the warrants for recovery of possession of the room illegally occupied by the respondent-judgment debtor. As against that the petition filed by the judgment debtor is against' the order regarding the attachment warrants of the property. (2) The facts, which give rise to both these petitio...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Air Conditioning Corpn. Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-1984
Reported in: (1985)LC156Tri(Delhi)
1. This is a Reference Application signed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta (claiming to be authorised by the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta to file the application on his behalf), in respect of order No. 160-B/84 dated 1-2-1984 [1985 (19) E.L.T. 206 (Tri.)]. Shri R.R. Gupta, Advocate for the respondent raised the following preliminary points and requested that the reference application be dismissed in limine.(1) The application is late by 27 days and no sufficient cause has been shown for such delay. (2) The Collector of Central Excise has not signed the application as required under Section 35G(1) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Instead he has authorised the Assistant Collector under Section 35B(2) to do so. The said Section 35B(2) applies to appeals filed before the Appellate Tribunal and does not cover Reference Applications. (3) The issue involved in the said order relates to rate of duty inasmuch as the question before the Bench was regardi...
Pnb Finance and Industries Ltd. and Others Vs. Miss Gita Kripalani, In ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-1984
Reported in: (1985)49CTR(Del)249; ILR1985Delhi299
Anand, J.1. This is a composite petition, under section 482 of the Cr. P. Code, by PNB Finance & Industries Ltd., for short, the company, its chairman, director and secretary, to quash 220 complaints against them filed by the Income-tax Officer, Company Circle, respondent herein, for offences under section 276B of the Income-tax Act; 1961, for short, the Act, and the orders summoning the petitioners in the complaints to stand their trial not only for an offence under the Act but also for an offence under section 409 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Prior to July 19, 1969, the company, which was then known as the Punjab National Bank Ltd., was a banking company, and the banking business of the company was transferred to and vested with the Punjab National Bank, a Corporation, wholly owned by the Government, with effect from the aforesaid date by virtue of an ordinance, which was later replaced by the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970. The company was paid a...
PenguIn Books Ltd. Vs. India Book Distributors and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Delhi29; 26(1984)DLT316
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J. (1) The appellants, Penguin Books Ltd of England original plaintiffs brought a suit for perpetual injunction against the respondents, M/s. India Book Distributors of New Delhi, Bombay, Madras, Calcutta (original defendants) restraining them from infringing Penguins' territorial c[license in 23 books, the subject matter of the suit. Admittedly India Book Distributors, Bombay are importing, distributing and offering for sale in India 13 out of these 23 titles. Some of these books arc well known works such as Animal Farm by George Orwell, Far Pavilion, Shadow of the Moon. both by M. M. Kaye. Some are recent publications such as Celebrity by Thomas Thompson, Lacs by Shiriey Conran. (2) Penguins asked for a temporary injunction in the suit. The application was heard by a learned single judge on the original side of this court where the suit was instituted. He refused the injunction. From his order of refusal Penguins appeal to this court. (3) The learned judge forme...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›