Delhi Court January 1989 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.
Suresh Kumar and ors. Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-1989
Reported in: 47(1992)DLT165; [1989(58)FLR454]; (1989)IILLJ110Del
B.N. Kirpal, J. (1) The petitioners were working in the Central Research Institute for Yoga (respondent No. 2) and have challenged in this writ petition the action of the said Institute in not absorbing them irregular service.(2) Briefly stated the facts are that petitioner No. 1 was appointed on 8/04/1981 as an Attendant by respondent No. 2 on daily wages w.e.f. 2/04/1981. Petitioner No. 2 was appointed as a Sweeper vide order dated 29/10/1984 by the said Institute on daily wages. Similarly, petitionerNo. 3 was appointed on 19/01/1982 on daily wages as a Peon by the said Institute. It is the case of the petitioners, and this is not denied by therespondents, that the petitioners continued to work on daily wages till their services were ultimately terminated on 11/12/1987 after the filing of the present writ petition.(3) At the time when the petition was filed the grievance of. the petitioners was that the respondent-Institute advertised in the newspaper on 1/02/1987 a number of posts, ...
Visnod Nagpal Vs. Bakshi S. Kuljas Rai
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-1989
Reported in: ILR1989Delhi173; 1989RLR186
Santosh Duggal, J. (1) The appellant herein was defendant in the suit (S. No. 108(80), instituted by the respondent in respect to a plot of land bearing No. E-2, Bali Nagar, New Delhi, which was alleged to have been let out to him under an agreement dated 22nd May, 1971 initially for a period of 11 months and extended from time to tims up to 22nd February, 1976. The suit was for recovery of possession on the plea that she tenancy of the defendant (appellant herein), had come to an end by efflux of time, having nut been renewed after 22nd of February, 1976 but nevertheless as a measure of abundant caution, the plaintiff also served a notice of termination of tenancy on the defendant with effect from 22nd March, 1977, by means of notice dated 28th February, 1977 duly served upon him, and that since the defendant had refused to surrender possession despite this notice, the suit was necessitated. (2) The suit was contested on a number of pleas, including denial of status of the plaintiff a...
Dunlop India Ltd. and anr. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-1989
Reported in: (1989)(22)ECC144
1. For the sake of convenience, facts as involved in the case of the first appellant would be given in the order below.2. Since a common question is involved in both these appeals a common order is being passed.3. Short question involved in both these appeals is whether a mixture of formaldehyde and caustic soda and resorcinol is resol resin and as such is liable to duty under Tariff Item 15-A of the CET as it stood during the period 5-9-1980 to 20-5-1983. From 21-5-1983 by Notification No. 158/83 the said solution has been exempted.4. The process of manufacture as described in the order-in-original which in turn was narrated by the appellant herein M/s. Dunlop India Ltd. is as follows:- "3(i) Mix resorcinol, formaldehyde, caustic soda and water with the solution in continuous agitation and with temperatures strictly within 15.5C-26.5C use as soon as possible after 15 hours for final mixing with 'B' stock. (ii) 'B' stock comprising rubber latex, caustic soda and water prepared. Simult...
NaraIn Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-1989
Reported in: 1989(2)Crimes686; 37(1989)DLT350
Santosh Duggal, J. (1) The appellant has come up with the present appeal sent from jail against his' conviction and sentences under sections 363, 363 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code recorded vide judgment dated 4th May, 1987 passed by Shri V.S. Aggarwal, Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi. By separate order recorded the same day, the accused was awarded sentence of R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs 50.00 and R 1. for one month in default for the offence under section 376 IPC; sentence of R.I. for three years and fine of R.S. 50.00 and in default R.I. for one month for the offence punishable under section 366 Indian Penal Code and sentence of R. 1. for three years and fine of Rs. 50.00 for the offence punishable under section 363 of the IPC: the imprisonment for default of payment of fine being here also one month. The substantive sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. (2) The plea of the appellant is that he has been falsely implicated in the case and that the trial court erred in a...
State of Haryana and anr. Vs. Shashi Prabha Saxena and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-1989
Reported in: 1(1989)ACC342
S.B. Wad, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the State of Haryana against the award of the Tribunal dated 23-7-1981, challenging the findings of the Tribunal in regard to the involvement of its bus No. HYA 703 in the fatal accident resulting in the death of Shri Ram Babu Sexana. Counsel for the parties have taken me through the evidence on record. There are eyewitnesses to the accident. I fully agree with the appreciation of the evidence by the Tribunal and do not find any ground to interfere with it. The appeal of the State of Haryana is, thereforee, dismissed.2. There is cross-objection filed by the claimants. The claimants had claimed Rs. 3 lakhs as compensation before the Tribunal while the Tribunal granted Rs. 77,000/- only. It is submitted by the counsel for the objectors that the Tribunal was wrong in assuming that the dependency of the family was Rs. 500/- per month only. It is further claimed that the Tribunal was wrong in taking 15 as the multiplier. Counsel for the State of Har...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Sudarshan Plywood Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-1989
Reported in: (1989)(22)ECC176
1. Short question involved in this appeal i whether the shuttering plywood manufactured by the respondents herein is structuare plywood.If it is so, then the respondents would not be entitled to the benefit of the Notification 55/79, dated 1.3.79 (as amended). 1.2 The respondent company submitted a classification list of commercial shuttering plywood falling under Tariff Item 16-B for approval effective from 183.82 claiming the benefit of the aforesaid notification applicable to commercial plywood. A show cause notice was, however, issued to the respondent company as to why the Central Excise duty @ 30% ad valorem (basic) instead of the concessional rate of duty of 20% ad valorem (basic) as claimed by them should not be charged, since the plywood manufactured by them was structural plywood and therefore, a higher rate of duty applicable to non-commercial plywoods was liable to be imposed. On adjudication, however, the Assistant Collector concerned dropped the proceedings and extended ...
Laksbrni Krishnan and ors. Vs. Gian Parkash Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-1989
Reported in: 1989(17)DRJ186
S.B. Wad, J.(1) This is an appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in Suit No. 234/7C, decided on 20-5-1975. The Tribunal recorded the finding that the deceased was getting Rs. 583.00 per month and on the basis of Rs. 300.00 per month as the dependency of the family the Tribunal worked out the figure of Rs. 86,400.00 towards compensation. The Tribunal took 24 as the multiplier since the deceased was 34 years old at the time of the accident. The claimants were the widow and three children (the mother was also a claimant, but died during the pendency of the appeal). The claimants have claimed Rs. 2 lakhs as compensation.(2) There is no cross-appeal filed by respondent No. 2, the Union of India who jeep No. Dll 4178, was found by the Tribunal to be the offending vehicle causing accident to deceased Shri S. Krishnan, while he was driving his scooter No. Dlj 6476 on 1-4-70. thereforee, in this appeal the only question that is left for determinati...
P.C. Puri Vs. Polyolefins Industries Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-1989
Reported in: 37(1989)DLT315
Mahesh Cliandra, J.(1) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner-defendant No, I against the order dated 11th November, 1983 of the learned Additional District Judge whereby the appeal preferred against the order dated 24th February 1984 of the Sub-Judge, 1st Class, Delhi granting stay of' dispossession till the decision of the suit was dismissed as time barred. The petitioner-defendant No. I feeling aggrieved has come up in revision before this court. (2) Brief facts giving rise to this revision are that the petitioner Shri P.C. Puri and other had obtained a decree for eviction of respondent No. 2- namely. The Monsento Chemicals of India (.P) Ltd. in respect of Property No. 46, Jor Bag Nursery, New Delhi and the respondent M/s. Polyolefin Industries Ltd. filed a suit for declaration that it was a tenant in possession of the suit property and was not liable to be dispossessed in execution of the said decree and in the said suit an application for ad interim injunction was...
Manjit Kumar @ Mintee Vs. Union of India and Two ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-1989
Reported in: ILR1989Delhi191
Santosh Duggal, J.(1) This writ petition, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed on behalf of the detenu Manjit Kumar @ Mintee, through his uncle Yash Pal, challenging his detention, vide order of detention dated 5th March, 1988, passed by Shri K. I. Verma Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue (COFEPOSA Unit), North Block, New Delhi, (respondent No. 2 herein), in exercise of the powers vested in him under section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA Act for short). The detention has been ordered with a view to preventing the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the augmentation of foreign exchange. The detention order was served on petitioner on 16th March, 1988, and he made a representation to the detaining authority on 22nd April, 1988, seeking revocation of the order of dete...
Seetha Lakshmi Krishnan and ors. Vs. Gian Parkash Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-1989
Reported in: 1(1989)ACC318
S.B. Wad, J.1. This is an appeal for enhancement of compensation, awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in Suit No. 234/70, decided on 20-5-1975. The Tribunal recorded the finding that the deceased was getting Rs. 583/- per month and on the basis of Rs. 300/- per month as the dependency of the family the Tribunal worked out the figure of Rs. 86,400/-towards compensation. The Tribunal took 24 as the multiplier since the deceased was 34 years old at the time of the accident. The claimants were the widow and three children (the mother was also a claimant, but died during the pendency of the appeal). The claimants have claimed Rs. 2 lakhs as compensation.2. There is no cross-appeal filed by respondent No. 2, the Union of India, whose jeep No. DLE 4178, was found by the Tribunal to be the offending vehicle causing accident to deceased Shri S. Krishnan, while he was driving his scooter No. DLJ 6476 on 1-4-70. thereforee, in this appeal the only question that is left for determinatio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »