Delhi Court August 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.
Leela Ram and ors. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-25-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ296; ILR1989Delhi16
Charanjit Talwar, J. (1) It appears that two of the appellants, i.e.. the parents of Leela Ram were also found injured after the said occurrence It is not clear as to on whose information, Chandi and his wife Smt. Chanda were removed to the Safdarjung Hospital. However, vide Ex. Public Witness 16/A, the M.L.C. in respect of Chandi, it is shown that he was admitted in the hospital at 10.15 P.M. with the alleged history of assault. It was found that he hail numerous injuries on his legs, arms and the scalp. In fact both his legs and one of his arms were fractured. Smt. Chanda was examined in that very hospital on 6th January. 1982 at 5.45 A.M. vide Ex. DX. her M.L.C. This M.L.C. shows that she had. received one lacerated wound in the left parietal region of 40 cm X O.5 cm and another minor injury in the right scapule. legion. We are highlighting this aspect as in the First Information Report about the occurrence, there is no Explanationn of the injuries sustained by the appellant Chandi,...
Mahavir Prashad Vs. Sukhdev Mongia and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-25-1989
Reported in: 40(1990)DLT82; 1990RLR95
R.N. Pyne, J. (1) This Regular First Appeal has been filed by the defendant/appellant Sfari Mahavir Prashad against the decree passed by the Additional District Judge dated 10th July, 1986 in Suit No. 224 of 1984 filed by this plaintiffs/respondents herein. The said decree was passed in favor of the plaintiffs/respondents for possession of the portion comprising of two rooms, one kitchen and common latrine and bath room on the ground floor of the property bearing No. 4759, Deputy Gaoj, Sadar Bazar, Delhi, and for damages for use and occupation with effect from 1st April, 1983 to 31st July, 1984 @ Rs.50U.00 per month as also for further damages at the same rate from 1st August, 1984 till recovery of possession. (2) In the plaint it is stated by the plaintiffs that they are the owners of property No. 4759. Deputy Ganj, Sadar Bazar, Delhi, which was construct- ed on plot No 5. It is further slated that they purchased the property by virtue of different registered sale deeds from its previ...
Balamurgan and Balamurli Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC543Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Balamurgan & Balamurli have filed a consolidated application for review of the Order No. 272 & 273/1988-B, dated 20th May, 1988 passed by the Tribunal. The applicants had challenged the order passed by the Tribunal in appeal petition under Section 35L of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 15th September, 1988 has disposed of the appeals vide Civil Appeal Nos. 2760-2761/88. The Supreme Court's order is reproduced below :- "The contention before us is that the Customs and Excise, Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi should have considered the point that the show cause notice served on the appellant was barred by time. The point may be raised before the said Appellate Tribunal by way of review and we need not entertain it at this stage. With this observation the appeals are rejected. To enable the appellant to apply to the Appellate Tribunal in that behalf we stay the recovery p...
Tamilnadu Steel Tubes Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-1989
Reported in: (1990)LC189Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Tamilnadu Steel Tubes Ltd., had filed the above captioned 5 appeals being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras. The particulars of the filing of appeals are as under :----------------------------------------------------------------Sl.No. Appeal No. Date of Communication.Due date.----------------------------------------------------------------5. C/2023/89 8-8-1988 8-11-1988---------------------------------------------------------------- Serial No. 1 to 3 in the above captioned appeals were filed on 21st July, 1989, whereas the due date was 29th September, 1988. Thus there is a delay of 295 days. In Serial No. 4 in appeal there is a delay of 2% days whereas the appeal in Sl. No. 5 there is a delay of 255 days.Since the common issue is involved in the above captioned applications for condonation of delay are disposed of by a consolidated order.2. Shri R. Sethuraman, Company Secretary of the applicant company has appeared on behalf of the a...
Jindal Exports (P.) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-1989
Reported in: (1989)31ITD217(Delhi)
1 to 22 [These paras are not reproduced here as they involved minor issues.] 23. This is an assessee's appeal arising out of CIT (Appeals), New Delhi's order dated 20-2-1989 and relates to assessment year 1985-86.24. Brief facts of the case may first be noted. The assessee had originally claimed deduction of Rs. 7,32,286, Under Section 80HHC which was-allowed by the ITO to the extent of Rs. 1,04,876. The assessee preferred an appeal and, on this point, the learned CIT (Appeals) vide his order dated 24-10-1988 restored the matter to the ITO's file and asked him to verify the assessee's claim and allow it in accordance with law. The assessing officer, vide his order dated 12-12-1986 passed in pursuance of the aforesaid order of the CIT (A) allowed the deduction under Section 80HHC at Rs. 2,48,128 as against the original figure of Rs. 1,04,876. The assessing officer did not allow deduction under Section 80HHC in respect of the turnover effected from the unit in Kandla Free Trade Zone. Th...
D.T.C. Vs. Mohinder Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-1989
Reported in: 1990ACJ739; AIR1990Delhi66; 1989(17)DRJ337
1. Even though the appeal was on my board the respondent or his counsel failed to appear. The appellant has made a grievance regarding the award dated 26th of Sept. 1980 by which the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal allowed a sum of Rs. 23,500 - with costs and interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the awarded amount from the date of the petition till its final realisation. There is a cross appeal F.A.0. No.71 of 1981 filed by Mohinder Singh against the D.T.C. and others making also a grievance against the quantum of the amount awarded. 2. The impugned award followed a petition under S.110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939 wherein allegation was made that the respondent herein on 29th of Oct. 1975 got involved in an accident at the hands of offending vehicle D.T.C. bus No. DLP 1038 as a result of which he sustained injuries particularly a fatal injury in the left leg which ultimately rendered him disabled permanently. Stating in a little detail, the facts are that on the date of incid...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Mohinder Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-1989
Reported in: ILR1990Delhi119
Malik, J.(1) Even though the appeal was on my board the respondent or his counsel failed to appear. The appellant has made a grievance regarding the award dated- 26th of September 1980 by which the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal allowed a sum of Rs. 23,500.00 with costs and interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the awarded amount from the date of the petition till its final realisation. There is a cross appeal F.A.O. No. 71 of 1981 filed by Mohinder Singh against the D.T.C. and others making also a grievance against the quantum of the amount awarded. (2) The impugned award followed a petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939 wherein allegation was made that the respondent herein on 29th of October 1975 got involved in an accident at the hands of offending vehicle D.T.C. bus No. Dlp 1038 as a result of which he sustained injuries particularly a fatal injury in tbs left leg which ultimately rendered him disabled permanently. Staling in a little detail, the facts ar...
Mohinder Kumar Vs. Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-1989
Reported in: ILR1989Delhi298
Malik Sharief-ud-din, J.(1) The appellant is aggrieved of an award dated 26th of July, 1980 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal allowing a sum of Rs. 36,000 as compensation in favor of respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 in the appeal. This followed claim petition, under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Acton the ground that one Tilak Raj husband of respondent No. 2herein died in a motor accident which took place on the light intervening 6th February and 7th February 1971 at about 1.30A.M. at G.T. Road, near Seelampur. (2) The facts as disclosed in the claim petition are that on the aforesaid date and time the deceased along with five more occupants was traveling in car No. Drp 34 from Delhi Shahdara to Delhi. At the relevant time Shri Mahinder Kumar Jain the appellant is stated to have been driving the car rashly and negligently and when it reached near Seelampur police post the appellant suddenly swerved to the right and hit violently against agree on the extreme right tide of the...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Western India Tanneries Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-1989
Reported in: (1989)(24)ECC66
1. In this appeal, the appellants are the Revenue who have sought for setting aside the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Bombay who had allowed the appeal of the respondents. The Revenue wants the restoration of the order in original.2. The brief facts of the case is that the respondents are the manufacturers of leather articles. They filed classification lists for the product (1) Dot straps (2) Chrome straps (3) Leather straps and (4) Soft leather straps. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise approved the said products under sub-heading 4201.90 attracting Central Excise duty at 12% ad valorem as articles of leather which are also being used as industrial product. The respondents being aggrieved by the said order of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Division II, filed an appeal before the Collector of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals) Bombay who allowed the appeal by order dated 27-10-1988 with consequential relief holding that the goods manufacture...
Kusum Products Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Aug-22-1989
Reported in: (1989)(24)ECC130
1. In this ROM application, the applicants have prayed for rectification of certain mistakes in the Tribunal's Order No. 740/88-C dated 16-9-1988. In paragraph-1 of the ROM application the applicants have stated that during the hearing of the appeal on 13-9-1988, Shri N.C. Chakraborty, authorised representative argued for the appellants whereas due to some communication gap, it appears, the name of Shri K.M. Lakhotia has been indicated instead of Shri N.C. Chakraborty. This point has also been reiterated by Shri N.C. Chakraborty while arguing on the ROM application before us. In the relevant column "present for the appellant" of the order sheet dated 13-9-1988 which was placed before the Bench hearing the appeal, the name of "Shri K.M. Lakhotia, consultant" was shown by the Court Master. In the circumstances, the name of Shri K.M. Lakhotia appeared in the Tribunal's Order instead of the name of Shri N.C. Chakraborty. This is a mistake apparent on record and is required to be rectified...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »