Delhi Court February 1990 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.
Ranbir Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1990
Reported in: 1990(3)Crimes207; 41(1990)DLT179; 1990(18)DRJ234
R.L. Gupta, J. (1) This petition has been moved by Shri RK. Saini,. Advocate under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for initiating a criminal complaint under Sections 193/197/198/199/200 of Indian Penal Code against Shri Mohd. Saleem Siddiqui, Advocate. The allegations are that the applicant is an Advocate and being an Officer of the Court he deemed it his duty to bring to the knowledge of this Court about a serious offence committed by Sh Mohd Saleem Siddiqui, Advocate in the course of judicial proceedicgs. It is further alleged that Mr. Siddiqui filed criminal revision No. 98/89 which was listed for preliminary hearing on 25th April, 1989 and argued by him before Mrs. Santosh Duggal, J. The petition was dismissed in liming on the same date. Thereafter Mr. Siddiqui filed another criminal revision petition No. 107/89 on the same facts which was listed for preliminary hearing before me on 19-5-1989. It was admitted on the point of sentence only and was finally disposed of o...
Om Saran Etc. Vs. Satya Dhawan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ1639; 1990RLR174
P.K. Bahri, J. (1) The short question which arises for decision in this criminal revision is whether the petitioners who are facing trial for an offence punishable u/S. 448 read with S. 34 of the I.P.C, ought to have been acquitted or not on the death of complainant Mr M.R. Dhawan who admittedly died on 20.7.88. (2) It is apparent from the allegations made in the complaint as well as the statements recorded in support of the complaint as reproduced in the Cr. R. petition itself that M.R. Dhawan and his wife were the aggrieved persons at the time the house trespass was committed by the petitioners in as much as complainant and his wife were manhandled by the petitioners while committing the house trespass. (3) As a very short question is involved, I have heard arguments in detail and proceed to dispose of this revision finally. (4) The offence u/S. 448, Indian Penal Code . is to be tried as a summons case and S. 256 of the Code is which runs : 'Non-Appearance or death of complainant- (1...
Ram Karan and anr. Vs. Roshan Lal and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1990
Reported in: 40(1990)DLT473; 1990(18)DRJ303
S.B. Wad, J. (1) This is tenants second appeal against the order Rent Control Tribunal directing his eviction under Section 14(l)(b) and 14(l)(k) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. The finding of the Tribunal is that appellant No. 1, Ram Karan, had sub-let the premises to appellant No. 1, Kanhaiya Lal without the consent in writing from the landlord. The other finding is that contrary to terms of the lease on which the plot under the suit premises has been given to the respondent landlord by the Dda, the appellant No. 2 is using the premises for non-residential purpose. (2) The concurrent finding of facts by the Rent Controller and by the Rent Control Tribunal are : 1.That the rent note was executed in favor of appellant No. 1. Ram Karan by the predecessor-owner of the respondents while letting out the premises and not in favor of appellant No, 2. Kanhaiya Lal; 2.The rent receipts all along have been given by the landlord in the name of appellant No. I, Ram Karan; 3.Appellant No 2, Kanba...
Laurence Vignard Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1990
Reported in: 40(1990)DLT539
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) This petition has been brought under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking quotient of the detention order dated October 19, 1989 passed by respondent No. 2 under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short Cofeposa Act') with a view to preventing the petitioner from smuggling goods. (2) The petitioner admittedly is a French national and had been apprehended on September 20, 1989 and 26 foreign marked gold biscuits of 10 tolas each and two foreign marked gold slabs of one kg. each had been recovered from her possession. Mr. Barski Marek had been also arrested Along with her. He is also a foreigner and a detention order was also passed against Mr. Barski Marek. No bail application has been moved by this petitioner and admittedly the petitioner is in judicial custody. One Brij Mohan Sethi was also apprehended Along with the petitioner ...
Poona Radiators Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1990
Reported in: (1990)(48)ELT93TriDel
1. The classification has been disputed in respect of Radiator Assys and Radiator Cores which are for supply to Indian Railways, as parts of railway locomotives which are sought to be classified under Chapter Heading 86.07 of the Central Excise Tariff by the appellant and under 84.09 by the Department.2. The classificaiton prior to 1-3-1986 was under T.I. 68. Thereafter from 1st March 1986 the Assistant Collector approved the classification of the products under Chapter Heading 86.07 as parts of Railway or Tramway Locomotives or rolling stock. In the classification list so filed they themselves drew the distinction between radiator falling under 84.09 and those raditors assembly and Cores for Railway or Tramway Locomotives or rolling stock under 86.07. The show cause notices were issued for period from July 1987 to November 1987, for a demand of Rs. 4,75,945.00, revising the classification under Heading 84.09. The Assistant Collector confirmed the demand and the Collector (Appeals) up...
Goodyear India Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1990
Reported in: (1990)LC461Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal is directed against the Adjudication Order-in-Original No. 65/86 dated 31.12.1986 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi.2. Factual backdrop : The appellants M/s Goodyear India Limited, Bal-labhgarh are the manufacturer of tyre, tubes and flaps assessable to Central Excise duty. On 1.1.86 truck No. DEL-356 loaded with tyres, tubes and flaps was going out of the factory of the company and on being checked by the security officer of the appellant company at the main gate it was found that tyres, tubes and flaps totally numbering 613 were loaded on the truck, whereas the documents such as Central Excise gate pass No. 3361 dated 1.1.86 and transfer order No. 0007 CAL dated 1.1.86 covering the said consignment were for a total number of 606 tyres, tubes and flaps only. Accordingly, the security officer did not allow and truck to move outside the factory gate and the matter was reported to the Central Excise staff on 2.1.86. As a consequence thereof the Central ...
Collector of Cus. Vs. Bengal Chemicals and
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1990
Reported in: (1990)(27)ECC112
1. This is a departmental appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No.Cal-Cus-740/87, dated 8-4-87 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Calcutta.2. M/s. Bengal Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Ltd., the respondents herein, imported a consignment of "Storax Prepared BP 1883" at the Port of Calcutta. As per the said description on the covering Bill of Entry, the substance was considered to fall under the category of Resinoid and was classified, and assessed to duty under Heading No. 3301.30 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Customs Tariff). A sample of the substance was tested by the Assistant Drugs Controller and found to be "Storax Prepared" conforming to B.P. Thereafter, the respondents filed a claim for refund of duty on the ground that the assessment should have been under Heading No.1301.90 of the Customs Tariff because prepared storax, according to them, was purified balsam. The claim was rejected by the Assistant Collector on t...
S.U. Submersible Pumps Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1990
Reported in: (1990)(29)LC513Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. S.U. Submersible Pumps (P) Ltd., Ghaziabad, have filed the above captioned appeals being aggrieved from the orders passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi. Since the issue involved is common, the same are being disposed of by this common order. Since the facts are similar, brief facts in respect of appeal No. E/2813/84-B1 are given below: The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of P.D. pumps and electric motors falling under Tariff Item 30-A and B respectively, at Ghaziabad. The appellants had claimed the benefit of notification No.198/76-CE dated 16th June, 1976 and had made refund claims and had stated that at the time of the clearance of the goods, the appellants could not claim the benefit of the notification No. 98/76-CE dated 16th June, 1976. Refund claims were filed on 6th November, 1978; the declarations had been filed by the appellants on 30th August, 1976; the base clearances had been fixed by the Assistant Collector and conveyed to the a...
State Bank of India Vs. S.S. Plyboard Udyog and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1990
Reported in: I(1990)BC315; 40(1990)DLT442; 1990(18)DRJ258
Smt. Sunanda Bhandare, J. 1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs. 2,74,840.14 by the plaintiff-bank under Order 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure in respect of the financial assistance granted to defendant No. 1, S. S. Plyboard Udyog, of which defendants Nos. 2 to 5 are partners. Defendants Nos. 6 and 7 are guarantors for defendants Nos. 1 to 5 for the repayment of the principal loan plus the interest accrued thereon. Apart from other securities and guarantee agreements executed by defendants Nos. 1 to 5, defendants Nos. 2, 3 and 4 executed a memorandum of deposit of title deeds dated April 19, 1985, of their property admeasuring 1,008 sq. yds out of Khasra No. 73/22 and 73/19 situated in the area and revenue estate of village Mundka, Delhi. Similarly, defendant No. 6 also executed a memorandum of deposit in Form 'A' of the title deeds of his property bearing Khasra No. 73/22 and 73/19 in village Mundka, Delhi, creating an equitable mortgage in favor of the plaintiff-bank. Defendant No. ...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Prithvi Raj
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1990
Reported in: [1990]185ITR369(Delhi)
Kirpal, J.1. The petitioner is seeking reference of the following three questions to this court :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that neither 1/6th share nor 1/36 share (being 1/6th of the 1/16th belonging to the bigger Hindu undivided family of late Maharaja H. H. Sawai Man Singh) could be said to have devolved on the assessed although the late Maharaja had originally during his lifetime filed the wealth-tax returns in 'individual' capacity and the claim of bigger Hindu undivided family subsequently made by the legal heirs of late Maharaja was an afterthought (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Tribunal is not perverse as it has been reached without taking into consideration the fact that the late Maharaja H. H. Sawai Man Singh during his lifetime had himself claimed the status of 'individual' and had filed the returns of wealth in that capacity (3) Whether the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »