Delhi Court May 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.
Ashoka Batteries Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1990
Reported in: (1990)(30)LC316Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants have filed four appeals arising out of the following orders-in-appeal. 1. E/1506/86-B1 : Against the order-in-appeal No. 549, 550 and 551 dated 20-12-1985. The order of the Collector (Appeals) in this appeal is with reference to the order-in-original No. 62-63/ACK.II/85 dated 31-5-1985 involving two refund claims for an amount of Rs. 1,57,500.01 and Rs. 37,137.22. 2. E/1507/86-B1: Against order-in-appeal No. 552-CE/KNP/85 dated 20-12-1985. The order of the Collector (Appeals) is with reference to the order-in-original C.No. CE/Int/T.I./31 (2)/80 dated 11-5-1984 involving entitlement of the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 80/80 dated 18-6-1980. 3. E/1508/86-B.1: Against the order-in-appeal No. 549, 550 and 551-CE/KNP/85 dated 20-12-1985. The order of the Collector (Appeals) is with reference to the order-in-original No. 41-42.ACK-II/85 dated 31-5-1985 which involves refund of two amounts - Rs. 1,36,777.35 and Rs. 8,321.75. 4. E/1509/86-B.1: Against the ord...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nem Chand GuptA.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1990
Reported in: [1990]33ITD52(Delhi)
ORDERPer Chander - The Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-VII, New Delhi is before us with a prayer that the following two questions, said to be questions of law and said to arise out of the order of the Tribunal bearing ITA No. 4040/DEL/1985 dated 31-7-1987 be referred to the Honble High Court for its option :-'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in holding that the balancing charge of Rs. 28,488 on sale of a truck was not exigible to tax when the income from the said truck for the assessment years 1974-75 to 1980-81 had been assessed on a net profit basis.2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law in holding that section 41(2) of the I. T. Act cannot be invoked on the basis of depreciation implicitly allowed in the computation of income ?'2. After hearing both the sides, however we are of the opinion that no referable question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal for the foll...
Daya Nand Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-27-1990
Reported in: II(1991)ACC507
V.B. Bansal, J.1. By way of this revision petition Daya Nand challenged his conviction under Section 304-A/279/337/338 IPC recorded by Metropolitan Magistrate on 4th October, 1989 and confirmed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi vide judgment dated 15th December, 1989. He has also challenged the sentence of R.I. for one year under Section 304-A IPC and a fine of Rs. 1000/- each for the offence under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for 6 months.2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, has been that on 16th September, 1978 the petitioner was driving bus No. DLB 5987 in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and struck against a tractor No. PNR 6689 on account of which Hukam Singh received simple injuries, Pehlad Singh received grievous injury and Umrao Singh also received injuries who succumbed to his injuries in the hospital.3. A perusal of the judgment of the appellate court indicates that the appeal was not contest...
Siri Ram Bansal Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-25-1990
Reported in: (1990)LC510Tri(Delhi)
1. By the present miscellaneous application under Section 129B(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, the applicant has sought the rectification of the common Order No. 24-27/85-A, dated 15th January, 1985 and also miscellaneous order No. 24, dated 24th February, 1986 in C/ROM/11/85-A, Misc. Order No. 90-93/86-A, dated 7th May, 1986 in C(ROM)4/86-A, Misc.Order No. 38 and 39/87-A, dated 19th February, 1987 in C(ROM)30 and 37/86-A and Misc. Order No. 163-164/87-A in C(ROM) 17 and 23/87-A. The matter had come up for hearing on 13th July, 1989 and at the outset of the hearing, the Bench had pointed out to Shri Bansal that the present ROM is in respect of various ROM orders passed by the Tribunal from time to time and in terms of Sub-section (2) of Section 129B of the Customs Act, 1962, ROM would be maintainable against an order passed under Sub-section (1) of Section 129B of the Customs Act, 1962 and no ROM appears to be maintainable against an order passed under Sub-section (2) of Section 129B of ...
Sham Sunder Vs. State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2370
ORDER1. This petition has been brought against order dated September 8, 1981, of an Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, by which he had dismissed the appeal filed against order of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi, dated July 16, 1981 by which he had imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,000/- (three thousand) on the petitioner. 2. This petition had reached for hearing throughout the last month as well as this month but no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Today in the earlier part of the day Mr. P. P. Khurana, Advocate, had appeared in another matter and he was apprised of this case and he expressed his regrets for not appearing earlier and had undertook to appear today to argue this matter but it is really unfortunate that the counsel has not cared to appear although case has been awaited till after lunch. I have now gone through the record of the lower court and proceed to dictate the judgment. 3. One of the pleas raised in the petition was that no personal bond was executed by the accu...
Texmaco Ltd. Vs. Arun Kumar Sharma and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-1990
Reported in: [1991]70CompCas287(Delhi); 42(1990)DLT115
Bahri, J.1. In all these criminal revision petitions, the same type of orders have been made by the learned A. C. M. M. and in revision by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and thus they are being disposed of by this order. 2. The facts in all these cases, in brief, are that Texmaco Ltd., the petitioner in all these revision petitions had filed criminal complaints against its various employees separately pleading that the petitioner-company had acquired the proprietary right in respect of the mills as well as the housing colonies by virtue of a scheme of arrangement arrived at between the complainant-company and Birla Cotton, Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. in pursuance of the orders passed by the Hon'sble High Court of Delhi on January 3, 1983, in Company Petition No. 59 of 1982. I am taking the facts from Criminal Revision No. 671 of 1990. Except for the name of the accused, all the other facts are similar in all the complaints. So, it was pleaded that the accused had joined Birl...
Vivek Vs. University of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-1990
Reported in: 42(1990)DLT254; 1990(19)DRJ167
S.N. Sapra, J.(1) Rule D.B. (2) By the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks to challenge the refusal/inaction, on the part of respondent No. 1. to give him admission, in the first years course of M.B , 1989, in Maulana Azad Medical College, Delhi. (3) In May, 1989, petitioner appeared in the entrance examination, conducted by respondent no 1, for admission to the M.B.,B.S. and Bds courses. Petitioner secured 772 marks out of the maximum of 1200 marks, and was placed at 239 position, in the merit list, along with 8 others at the same rank, who had secured the same marks. Finally petitioner's rank was declared at 247. In the first instance, respondent no. 1 allotted M.B,B.S. seats to the first 223 students in its various colleges, according to the preference of each of the candidates. Petitioner was, however, allotted Bds course, which he relinquished. Subsequently, respondent no. 1 allotted seats in the M.B , course to selected can...
Girisii Kakkar and anr. Vs. Dhakwanti and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ5; 42(1990)DLT167
Y.K. Sabharwal, J.(1) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') seeking quashing of criminal proceedings and the order dated 10th October, 1986 passed by Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi. By the impugned order notice has been given to the petitioner and other accused under Section 251 of the Code holding that prima facie case is made out against the accused persons under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code. (2) Respondent No. I Dr. (M..) Dhanwanti, is the complainant. She has filed a complaint dated 26th August 1981 against seven accused under Section 500, Indian Penal Code. Petitioner No. 1 Girish Kakkar has been arrayed as accused No. 6. Petitioner No. 2 Ram Saran Kakkar was arrayed as accused No. 7. Ram Saran Kakkar died during the pendency of the present petition. The allegations made in the complaint are briefly these :- (3) The complainant is the legally wedded wife of Sh D. N. Waswani, who was arrayed as accused No. 1. D. N. Was...
Ranjan Gupta Vs. A.F. Ferguson and Company
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-1990
Reported in: 42(1990)DLT66
N.N. Goswamy, J. (1) This revision petition by the owner-landlord is directed against the order dated 9.2.1989 passed by the Additional Rent Controller, Delhi, whereby his petition under Section 14(l)(e) read with Section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act was dismissed. (2) Though the petition has not been formally admitted but I have looked into the entire record and I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length at the admission stage itself. The petitioner is the owner landlord of premises No. 56-B; Friends Colony, New Delhi. First floor of the premises was let out to the respondent company. Originally the petition was filed on the ground that the ground floor of the premises which was in occupation of the petitioner was occupied by his mother and his sister and her daughter. It was alleged that the sister had been deserted by her husband and thereforee was dependants on the petitioner for residence. It was pleaded that the petitioner was enjoying a very high status and ...
Sushila Bhatia Vs. Gurbux Singh Randhir
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-1990
Reported in: 41(1990)DLT623; 1990(19)DRJ80
S.B. Wad, J.(1) This is a petition filed by the landlady Smt. Sushila Bhatia against the order of the learned Rent Controller dismissing her application for evection of the respondent under Section 14(1)(e) read with Section 20(B) (Section 25(B) Sic) of the Delhi Rent Control Act.(2) The suit premises consists of three rooms, store, bathroom, kitchen court yard on the first floor of property No. J-2/15 Rajouri Garde, New Delhi. these premises were let to out the respondent on 1st August, 1980 on the monthly rental of Rs. 850.00 . The petition for eviction was filed in 1981.(3) In her eviction petition the landlady had contended that she had been residing with her married son at Gopinath Bazar where residential accommodation is of one room. The married son had a son and another one was expected. she claimed that the one room at Gopinath Bazar was insufficient for her need for the need of her family. She had contended that her relations with the daughter-in-law had become strained and, t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »