Delhi Court January 1991 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.
Bimla Rani and anr. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT348
S.B. Wad, J. (1) These are old appeals of the year 1976-77 and pending in this Court for more than 15 years. However, it is unfortunate that the Counsel are not attending to the old matters with the result that the Court is required to exert its own to dispose of the old matters. (2) R.S.A. No. 17 and 18 of 1976 arise between the same parties and raise the common question of law. They are being disposed of by one judgment. Two suits were filed by the appellant, one being Suit No. 1274/72 and the other being Suit No. 5 ^2/73, challenging the house-tax in regard to property No. M-15, Green Park Extension, New Delhi. The suits were dismissed by the trial Court. That gave rise to R.C.A. Nos. 485/75 and 484/75. The two R.C. As were also dismissed by the Senior Sub Judge. The present R.S. As are filed against the dismissal of the appeal by the learned Senior Sub Judge. It appears that the total demand of house-tax was about Rs.l8,000.00 . At the time of admission the counsel for the appellan...
Dhondup Lama Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: 1991(1)Crimes571; 43(1991)DLT377
V.B. Bansal, J. (1) Dhondup Lama, has by way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution prayed that the order dated 25th January, 1990, for his detention may be quashed and he may be set at liberty. (2) On 25th January, 1990 Shri Mahendra Prashad, Joint Secretary to the Government of India, a specially empowered officer passed an order for the detention of the petitioner with a view to preventing him from engaging in transporting smuggled goods and dealing in smuggled goods otherwise than by engaging in concealing or keeping smuggled goods. (3) Facts leading to the passing of the impugned order are that 13 packages were found containing smuggled goods and the petitioner was one of the persons who had gone to collect the same and his statement was recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act and it is thereafter that he was arrested on 26th November, 1989. He was produced before the Metropolitan Magistrate. Calcutta, the same day and was remanded to custody. His bail a...
H.C. Chopra Vs. Anand Kumari
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT500
Sunanda Bhandare, J.(1) The respondent had filed a petition for eviction of the appellant under Section 14(l)(e) and 14(l)(h) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Additional Rent Controller by his judgment dated 7.2.1987 dismissed the eviction petition on both the grounds. Being aggrieved, the respondent filed an appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal. The Rent Control Tribunal by the impugned judgment dated 27.7.1987 allowed the petition under Section 14(l)(h) but dismissed the petition under Section 14(l)(e) of the Act. The appellant has challenged this order of the Rent Control Tribunal by way of the present second appeal. (2) CROSS-OBJECTIONS have been filed by the respondent and eviction is sought also under Section 14(l)(e) of the Act. One of the main contentions of the respondent is that the appellant has constructed some additional floors at a house which belongs to him at 25/30 New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi. The case of the appellant is that...
Maharaja Ashok Pal Vs. New Delhi Municipal Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-1991
Reported in: 1991RLR131
R.L. Gupta, J.(1) The plaintiff filed the present suit on 3.2.90 for grant of permanent injunction restraining the defendant. New Delhi Municipal Committee (NDMC) with the allegations that the plaintiff is a co-lessee of plot bearing No. 10 and measuring about one acre in Block 159 at 10, Bhagwan Das Road, New Delhi. The lease had been granted in favor of the plaintiff and his mother vide registered deed dt. 12.1.82. S.D. Madan is a duly constituted attorney of the plaintiff as well as his mother and has been entrusted with the work of construction of multi-storeyed building on the aforesaid plot. A plan for 8 stories with basement up to 80 feet height was sanctioned by Ndmc vide Resolution No. 13 dt.12.11.84. The plan was revalidated up to 20.11.91 by the Administrator of Ndmc vide Resolution No. 9 dt. 7.9.89 on depositing the compounding charges of Rs. 1.5 lakhs which was duly paid by the plaintiff. A second basement constructed by the plaintiff initially unauthorisedly, was also san...
Pawan Biscuit Company (P) Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: (1991)LC315Tri(Delhi)
The appellant carries on business of manufacturing and sale of biscuits. They obtained a licence No. FP/BIS/85 from the Central Excise authorities. They manufacture biscuits on their own behalf and also on job work basis. They entered into a job work agreement with Britania Inds. Ltd. (hereinafter called as BIL) and the said agreement is renewed from time to time. The agreement dated 15th December, 1986 is the agreement relevant for the purpose of deciding the dispute in this case. Under the agreement BIL supplies raw materials for the manufacture of branded biscuits. The appellants have to convert the raw material into biscuits bearing such brand names belonging to BIL. The appellants will be paid job work charges at a fixed rate per kg. which covers the cost and profit of the appellants. The appellants shall be responsible for compliance with the provision of the Central Excise Act and Rules framed thereunder and shall maintain separate accounts and records regarding the payment of ...
Atic Industries Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: (1991)LC48Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal is a transferred Revision Petition directed against the order in review dated 31st May 1982 of the Collector of Central Excise, Baroda, setting aside the order of the Assistant Collector dated 9-1-1979 and confirming a demand for Central Excise duty for Rs. 33,25,832.38. The relevant facts and events leading to the present appeal are set out hereunder :- 2. Since 1955, the appellants have been manufacturing dye-stuffs at Atul in the State of Gujarat. The appellants sell the said dye-stuffs in wholesale lots to I.C.I. Private Limited and Atul Products Limited, who resell the goods to their customers. Since 1961, excise duty was charged on the said dye-stuffs. The Excise authorities contended that the assessable value of the dye-stuffs manufactured by the appellants had to be determined on the basis of resale price of the said wholesalers, I.C.I. Private Limited and Atul Products Limited in respect of the price at which the said dye-stuffs were sold by the appellants to t...
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: (1992)(38)LC84Tri(Delhi)
1. The appellants filed a price-list. Without waiting for the approval of the price-list they have cleared the goods under gate pass No. 65 dated 10th June, 1981. Therefore, a show cause notice was issued proposing to impose penalty on the ground that the appellants contravened Rule 173C of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. On receipt of the reply the Asstt. Collector imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,000/-, against which the appellants filed a review petition under Section 35A(2) of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944.2. The Collector dismissed the review petition on the ground that the appellants nave not given any reason for not preferring any appeal within the period of limitation or not filing the revision within the period. He also held that Section 35A of the Act cannot be used as a means to circumvent the limitations contained in Section 35. Against which the appellants have come up in appeal before us.3. The main contention of the appellants is that the review powers under Sectio...
Mohd. Asif Vs. State (Delhi Admn.)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2524; 43(1991)DLT557; 1991(20)DRJ345
1. On 15th March, 1989 the following charge under section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short NDPS Act) was framed against Mohd. Asif by an Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi :- 'That on 4-10-88 at about 5 p.m. Chowk Kirby Palace, Delhi Cantt. within the jurisdiction of P.S. Delhi Cantt. you were found in possession of 100 grams of Heroin, a manufactured drug. And thereby you committed an offence punishable under section 21 of NDPS Act and within my cognizance .......' 2. Mohd. Asif pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed trial. 3. In support of this case prosecution examined eight witnesses. The plea taken up by Mohd. Asif during the recording of his statement under section 313 of the Criminal P.C. (for short the Code) was of complete denial. It was further pleaded by him that he has been falsely implicated and no independent witness was present at the time of the alleged recovery. He examined five witnesses in defense. 4. Mohd. Asif was fo...
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Another Vs. the Delhi Development ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: AIR1991Delhi298; ILR1991Delhi634
ORDER1. This is plaintiffs' suit for recovery of Rs. 2,91,500/- for less of truck parked at the parking lot of the defendants and was stolen from there. The plaintiffs number two and the defendants three. First plaintiff carries on the business of general insurance and the truck bearing Engine Number 692 D 22854785 and Chassis Number 364046844126 was insured with it by plaintiff No. 2 who was owner of the truck. It was Tata make truck of 1987 model. First defendant is constituted under the Delhi Development Act, 1957 and has various functions to perform under the Act. It was maintaining a truck parking centre at Majm-ka-tilla, Delhi, and the name given to the parking centre was Idle Truck Parking Centre. Second defendant is Union of India in the Ministry of Urban Development through its Secretary, and the third defendant is the Traffic Manager of the aforesaid truck parking centre. Second defendant has been imp leaded on the ground, that it owns, controls and looks after and is respons...
Moola Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-1991
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT340
S.C. Jain, J.(1) The facts giving rise to this revision petition are that on receipt of information from Sho Narela, that one Todar son of Kallu resident of Bawana had caused obstruction to persons using the public path which join Babadurgarh Road with pacca passage of village Bawana, Sdm Kingsway Camp issued notice under Section 133 Cr, P.C. and after examining the witnesses and hearing the parties, he ordered that Todar should remove the obstruction i.e. the wall which had blocked the passage and ten days time was given. (2) Aggrieved by the said order, a revision petition was filed before the Addl. Sessions Judge, who by his order dated August 4, 1979 set aside the order passed by the S.D.M. and held that the proceedings under Section 133 Cr. B.C. were not maintainable. (3) Aggrieved, this revision petition under Section 397 Cr. P.C. has been filed by Shri Moola son of Shri Mohlar. Though the case has been pending since 1979, and has been on the board of this court, none appeared. I...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »