Delhi Court January 1986 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.
inder Raj Malik and ors. Vs. Sunita Malik
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-1986
Reported in: 1986CriLJ1510; 1986(2)Crimes435; 1986RLR220
G.R. Luthra, J. (1) By way of this judgment, two petitions and two criminal misc. applications are being decided. One petition registered as Criminal Misc. (Main) 979185 was filed by Inder Raj Malik and three others against an order of Shri R. K. Jain, Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi. That order was passed on a complaint of Smt. order, the learned magistrate directed the summoning of the petitioners (hereinafter referred to as the accused) in respect of commisssion of an Suntia Malik (hereinafter referred to as the complainant). Vide the aforesaid offence punishable under section 498A Indian Penal Code and also summoning accused No. 1 and 2 in respect of commission of an offence punishable under section 406 Indian Penal Code . The other petition being Criminal Misc. (Main) 1222185 was filed by the complainant. Her grievance is that all the accused should have been summoned in respect of commission of the offences punishable under sections 406 and 327 read with section 109 Ipc in add...
Krishna Kumari and ors. Vs. Bhola Ram and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-1986
Reported in: I(1986)ACC555; 1986(10)DRJ184
S.B. Wad, J. (1) F.A.O. 34 of 1972 is filed by the claimants for enhancement of compensation. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had awarded Rs. 19,200.00 while the claimants had asked for Rs. 80,000.00 as. compensation. F.A.O. 55 of 1972 is filed by the Insurance Company and the owner of the vehicle. (2) Shri Ishwar Chand died in an accident on 8.268 caused by bus number DLP. 3175. The deceased was going on a cycle towards his office at old Rohtak Road from Sarai Rohilla side towards Chandni Chowk. The said bus going towards chowk Sarai Rohilla hit the cyclist. The driver of the bus did not stop the bus but ran away. An F.I.R. was lodged and the site plan was prepared, by the police. This was produced in the evidence. The driver of the bus was prosecuted and was convicted under Section 304-A. PWs. 5 and 6 are eye witnesses. They saw the bus running at 30 to 40 miles an hour, and knocking the cyclist. I am taken through the evidence of these eye witnesses and I find them trustworthy. N...
Pal Singh Vs. Sunder Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-1986
Reported in: 29(1986)DLT385; 1986(10)DRJ258
Charanjit Talwar, J. (1) By this second appeal Pal Singh seeks setting aside of judgment passed on 14th April, 1980 by Shri V.S. Aggarwal, Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi whereby while reversing the order of the Additional Rent Controller the tenant-appellant herein was directed to be evicted under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. (2) The landlord namely Sunder Singh had filed the application for eviction of his tenant from three rooms and a courtyard in premises No. 2216 to 2222, Gali Inder Chammar, Teliwara, Delhi on the ground that the said portion of the premises which had been let out for residential purposes was bonafide required by him for himself and members of his family residing with him. The eviction petition was contested by the appellant-herein and a preliminary objection was raised that as he was not the sole owner of the property in question the landlord. Sunder Singh, had no locus standi to file the petition. On merits it was urged that the property had been...
Smt. Rajshuri Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-1986
Reported in: (1986)53CTR(Del)256; [1987]163ITR473(Delhi)
S. Ranganathan, J.1. These are three applications under section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act. The assessed who is the petitioner prays that this court should direct the Tribunal to state a case and refer the following questions, said to be questions of law arising out of the Tribunal's orders, for the decision of this court : '1. Whether, the learned Tribunal was justified in ignoring the applicability of the provision of rule 1BB in valuation of the property 6, Friends Colony, New Delhi, owned by the petitioner, which being a procedural provision was both retrospective and mandatory. 2. Whether, the learned Tribunal was justified in upholding the valuation by land and building method in respect of the property 6, Friends Colony, New Delhi, as against the rent yield method ignoring the well-settled principles laid down by different courts including the Supreme Court in the case of Dewan Daulat Rai Kapoor v. New Delhi Municipal Committee : [1980]122ITR700(SC) to the effect that valuation...
Ravinder Pal Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-1986
Reported in: 1986(2)Crimes183; 1986(10)DRJ300
G.R. Luthra, J. (1) By way of this order two petitions--one of Ravinder Pal Singh which is Cri. Misc (M) 100/86 and the other of Amrik Singh which is Crl Misc. (M) 101/86 are being decided. Both of them had applied to the Court of Sessions for grant of bail. The application of Amrik Singh was rejected on November 1, 1985 by Shri S.R. Goel.Addl. Sessions Judge. Delhi. A copy of order of Shri S.R, Goel has been placed on record of the petition filed by Amrik Singh. The application of Ravinder Pal Singh was rejected on 8th January 1986 by another Addl. Sessions Judge and copy of the order of learned Addl. Sessions Judge has been placed on record of the petition of the Ravinder Pal Singh. (2) Both the petitioners were involved in conspiracy to place transistor bombs and thereby committing murders and actually murders took place on account of blast of transistor bombs. They are also involved in the commission of offences punishable under the provisions of Explosive Substance Act. (3) It may...
Anil Bhardwaj Vs. Nirmlesh Bhardwaj
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Delhi111; ILR1986Delhi383
Mahinder Narain J.(1) This is a husbands appeal from a judgment dated 30th March. 1983, passed in Hindu Marriage Act case No. 383 of 1980. by the Additional District Judge, Delhi. (2) The husband had filed a petition for decree of divorce under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 19-55. It was stated in the petition that a marriage between the parties was solemnized according to the Hindu rites on 31-1-1979. The marriage was a simple affair. The petition of the husband was found upon t.'ie cruelty. Paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 of the petition read as under :- '6.That the behavior of the respondent was not normal with the petitioner. She behaved in a very unto ward and abnormal manner with the petitioner and the members of his family. She would not do any of the house-hold duties and would complaint that after attending office, she was dead-tired. She also complained that she was not used to domestic chores as she had never worked in the home and declared that she would not do any house-hold...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Shree Bhawani Cotton Mills and
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-1986
Reported in: (1989)(43)ELT762TriDel
1. In this appeal, filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh, the only issue involved is as to whether the charges on account of Bank commission, Hundi commission or interest charged in the invoices be included in the assessable value or not. The Collector (Appeals) had held that these being post-clearance expenses and the commission as well as interest being payable to the bank, though charged in the account of the customers in the invoice, are to be given abatement from the assessable value in terms of the provisions of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, and in view of the fact that appellants had opted for the procedure of clearances on invoice-value under Notification No. 120/75-C.E. would not make any difference.2. It is contended in the appeal that once a party opts for the procedure of Notification No. 120/75-C.E., then it cannot claim benefit of the provisions of Section 4 and, as such, the Collector (Appeals) has gone wrong in holding that in spite of option for ...
State (Delhi Administration) Vs. Ramesh Chand
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-1986
Reported in: 29(1986)DLT483
Aggarwal, J. (1) This is an appeal by the Delhi Administration against the judgment of Shri K. B. Andley, Additional Sessions Judge, allowing the appeal of the accused Ramesh Chand and acquitting him of the charge under section 7 read with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. (hereinafter called 'the Act'). (2) The relevant facts are these. On 6th November 1982 at about 3.45 p.m. Shri R. K. Ahuja, Food Inspector, purchased a sample of Kaju for analysis under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rules from the premises of Super Store, J-21/ 15B, B. K. Dutt Market, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi. The Food Inspector divided the sample in three equal parts and bottled it in three separate bottles. One part of the sample was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis and report. The Public Analyst in his report dated 7th December 1982 found the sample to contain 11 per cent of insect damaged Kaju against the maximum prescribed standard of 5.0 per cent. He further found that...
Niranjan Kumar Mittal Vs. Promod Kumar Mittal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-1986
Reported in: 1986(1)ARBLR413(Delhi); 29(1986)DLT363; 1986(10)DRJ280
D.K. Kapur, C.J.(1) This appeal is directed against the Judgment in suit No. 564-A/82. The said judgment was delivered in relation to an award made by Shri Kishan Chand Mittal on 24th March, 1982. The Arbitrator was the father of the parties Promod Kumar Mittal and Niranjan Kumar Mittal. Objections were filed to the award which were decided. It was held that the arbitrator was in error in proceeding to decide the case in the absence of the objector Niranjan Kumar Mittal. The learned single Judge held that if the Arbitrator wanted to proceed ex-parte, it was necessary to give a notice and hence the award had to be set aside and accordingly the same was remitted for decision afresh by the arbitrator. (2) At the hearing, the learned counsel for the appellant urged that the award should not be remitted back to Shri K.C. Mittal on the ground that he was biased against the objector. The learned single Judge rejected this contention on the ground that Shri K.C Mittal, was the father of the tw...
Pooran Chand Vs. State and
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-1986
Reported in: 1986(3)Crimes50; 1986(10)DRJ192
Charanjit Talwar, J.(1) A complaint was filed by respondent No. 2 herein. Ram Asrey, against M.B. Singh, Advocate, who had been appointed local commissioner by the Court of a Sub-Judge 1st Class, for having committed an offence under Section 167, Indian Penal Code. The petitioner herein, Puran Chand, was alleged to have abetted the said Advocate in the commission of that offence. The trial Court vide its order dated 26th April, 1980, summoned the petitioner herein as well as M.B Singh. It is the admitted case of the parties that the complaint had been filed some time in the year 1977. It appears that the petitioner herein moved an application on 25th June, 1983, under Section 245(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to be discharged. By order of 7th August, 1985, that application was dismissed. It is that order which is impugned in this miscellaneous petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is the admitted case of the parties that so far the pre-charge e...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »