Delhi Court December 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.
Sulekh Chand JaIn Vs. State (Delhi Administration)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-1991
Reported in: 43(1991)DLT136
Malik Sharief-ud-Din, J. (1) Even thought this case is no my board for a long time , the counsel for the parties have not put in any appearance. I, thereforee proceed to decide this revision petition on merits. (2) The petitioner along with Prem Shanker Shukla and Urmila Shukla was prosecuted under sections 419/420 Indian Penal Code with the aid of section 120-B IPC. Urmila Shukla was acquitted whereas the appellant and Prem Shanker Shukla were convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years on each count. The learned Additional Sessions Judge upheld the conviction and modified the sentence and reduced it to one year's rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences were made concurrent, (3) NOW. briefly staling the facts as disclosed by Public Witness . 9 the Manager of Lepakshi Handicraft Emporium, New Delhi, which was being run by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, are that no 22nd/23rd April 1970 he received a telephone message from a person who named himself as P.S. Shuk...
Siri Pal and ors. Vs. Delhi Transpokt Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT157
P.N. Nag, J.(1) This appeal is directed against the order dated 17.12 1986 passed by Shri V.B. Gupta, Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 60,000.00 to the appellants. The amount was to be paid to the appellants as per the directions issued therein. Respondent No. 2-Delhi Transport Corporation was also held liable to pay Interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of the impugned judgment till realisation. (2) Being aggrieved against this order dated 27th January, 1988, the appellants have filed the present appeal and prayed for enhancement of compensation along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of presentation of the petition till realisation. However, the appeal was admitted on the question of interest only. (3) The appeal was placed before the Lok Adalat on 7th July, 1991 and the parties voluntarily agreed to resolve the controversies before the Court amicably. They also agreed to abide by the terms...
Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Education Society (Regd) of India and anr. Vs. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT155
P.N. Nag, J. (1) This petition is directed against the order dated 3.8.1989 passed by Shri S.N. Kapoor, Additional District Judge, Delhi whereby he has accepted the appeal and set aside the order dated 16.1.1986 passed by Shri R.D. Goel, Estate Officer-V vide which the Estate Officer has assessed the damages and confirmed the demand of Rs, 76,564.88 for unauthorised occupation of the disputed land from 21.81975 to 31.3.1980. The learned Additional District Judge set aside the order of the Estate Officer on the ground that there was virtually no evidence about the rate of damages before the Estate Officer and the damages have been assessed without any evidence. thereforee, in such circumstances, he remanded the case back to the Estate Officer for rehearing the matter afresh for the assessment of damages. However, he has further ordered that the appellant should pay 50% of the amount demanded after adjustment of the amount already paid. (2) After hearing Counsel for the parties, I am of ...
Technocraft Industries Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-1991
Reported in: (1992)(41)LC299Tri(Delhi)
1. By the present application the applicants have made a prayer for dispensing with pre-deposit of differential excise duty amounting to Rs. 86,750/-. Shri Gopal Prasad, learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the applicants. He stated that the period involved is 1.11.1986 to 31.5.1987 and the show cause notice is dated 4.6.1987. He pleaded that the applicants had been filing classification list regularly and they filed the last classification list on April, 1986 which was approved on 4.2.1987. He argued, that if at all the Revenue proposes to change the classification it can be changed prospectively and not retrospectively. In support of his arguments he relied on a decision in the case of Breaks (sic) India Ltd. and Ors. v. CCE , and thereafter Anr. decision of theCollector of Central Excise v. Indian Oxygen Ltd. reported in 1991 (51) ELT A-36 wherein the appellate Tribunal without expressing any opinion as to the classification of goods held that the re-classification of goods i...
D.C.M. Data Products Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-1991
Reported in: (1993)(66)ELT635TriDel
1. The issue is whether the refund claim of the appellants is barred by limitation. The goods namely electronic goods were exempted from payment of duty on 15-3-1985. Duty was again levied w.e.f. 1-3-1987. Since the appellants were selling the goods in retail, he met the Asstt. Collector and discussed with him the permissible deductions they could claim including 18% abatement from retail price. Since the Asstt. Collector wanted time to examine the issue, the appellants as per his advice, declared the retail price in part V of the Price List and started paying duty under protest without claiming any deductions towards abatement or other post manufacturing expenses from retail price. A detailed representation was also given on 13-3-1987 to the Asstt. Collector indicating inter alia that they would be paying duty under protest pending finalisation of their price list.3. In the price list effective from 1-3-1987, they made an endorsement stating, "please refer to our letter No. DP/ADM/AI...
Sparr Equipments Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-1991
Reported in: (1992)(42)LC702Tri(Delhi)
1. M/s. Sparr Equipments Ltd., 122/1, Railway Colony Road, Yeshwantpur, Bangalore-560022 have filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras. The said appeal was received in the Registry on the 10th November, 1989, that is, within limitation. The present appeal is against Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Order-in-Appeal No. 183/89(B) dated 7.8.1989 and the appeal before the Collector (Appeals) was against the order passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Yeshwantpur Division dated 28/31.10.1988 issued from file C.No. V/84/3/207/86.Thereafter the applicant has filed a stay application which was received in the South Regional Bench, Madras, on 1.4.1991, and the same-was transferred to the Central Registry at New Delhi. The applicant has sent a telegraphic request for listing the matter on 2.12.1991 as the authorities were pressing for payment. Shri Sampath, the learned advocate, had made a mention in the open ...
income-tax Officer Vs. M.P. Laghu Udyog Nigam Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-1991
Reported in: (1992)41ITD135(Delhi)
1. In this case the ITO, A-Ward, Bhopal, while making assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') for assessment year 1983-84, charged interest under Sections 215 and 216. But in appeal the CIT (Appeals), Bhopal cancelled such charge on the ground that the amended provisions of subsections (3) and (6) of Section 215, which permitted charge of interest under Sections 215 and 216 in such a case, had come into force w.e.f. 1-4-1985 and were not applicable to the year under consideration. Hence this appeal by Revenue.2. When this appeal was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that this Bench of the Appellate Tribunal at Delhi does not have the jurisdiction to hear and determine this appeal from the order passed by CIT (Appeals), Bhopal. The learned counsel further submitted that the Indore Bench only could hear and determine this appeal. The learned D.R. on the other hand, submitted that the appellant in th...
Nairs Arkimetals (P) Ltd. Vs. New Delhi Hotels Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT93; 1992(22)DRJ199
Jaspal Siagh, J.(1) Sub Rules 3 and 4 of Rule 3 of Order 37 of,the Code of Civil Procedure and Form 4-A in Appendix-B have given cause to this order. However, first a bonsai view of the back-drop. (2) The suit is under Older 37. Consequent upon service of summons in Form 4 in Appendix-B, the defendant entered its appearance and thereupon complied with the' requirement of sub-Rule 3 of Rule 3. Turn then came for the plaintiff to proceed according to sub-Rule 4 and it really did so, inasmuch as summons for judgment in Form 4-A in Appendix-B was served on the defendant. As the summons holds the pivot, I must reproduce it. It says: Upon reading the affidavit of the plaintiff the court makes the following order, namely: Let all parties concerned attend the court on the 25th day of January, 1991 at O'Clock in the forenoon on the hearing of the application of the plaintiff that he be at liberty to obtain judgment in this suit against the defendant (or if against one or some or several insert ...
Vimal Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT582
R L. Gupta, J.(1) Petitioner is facing prosecution for offences under Sections 394/397/302/460/411 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code registered in Ps Trilok Puri, Delhi along with some others. He has applied for bail. (2) The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 2,6.90 some unknown person informed the police that murder and robbery had taken place in flat No. 291, phase Ii, Mayur Vihar, Delhi. The police went there and r-corded the statement of Ashok Kumar Gupta. He stated that he and his wife Smt. Asha were employed in a Bank. They returned from the office at about 6.00 Pm that day and found his parents and child aged 4 years missing. The house was locked from out side. After waiting for their return in futile, the lock was broken open with the help of one Chandra and to their utter surprise blood-soaked dead bodies of his parents in one room and that of their child in bath room were lying. The goods in the house were also lying scattered. (3) There is no direct evidence. ...
Hukam Chand Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-1991
Reported in: 46(1992)DLT146
R.L. Gupta, J.(1) This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed against an order dated 20.1.90 passed by the learned Asj, Delhi ordering release of Bus No. Dep 4714 on Super dart to Mani Ram, respondent No. 2 seized by the police in case Fir No. 147/89 registered under Sections 406 and 420 Indian Penal Code in Ps Samay Pur Badli, Delhi at the instance of respondent No. 2 Mani Ram. (2) In brief the allegations are thaton4.10.82oneHarjeetSinghson of Thakur Singh purchased the impugned bus and started plying it on Dtc route. The bus was financed by State Bank of India, Gandhi Nagar branch. On 19.11.87 Sanjeev Chopra accused in the aforesaid Fir purchased the bus from him on the basis of usual documents. The bus continued to be plied under Dtc operation. Name of Harjeet Singh remained on the account because it was he who was to collect payment from the Dtc and deposit the same on account No. 25782 opened jointly by him along with petitioner in PNB. West P...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »