Delhi Court July 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.
Parekh Prints Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-1991
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT456; 1992(37)ECC78; 1991LC167(Delhi); 1992(62)ELT253(Del); ILR1992Delhi304
D.P. Wadhwa, J. 1. In this batch of writ petitions numbering over 50, the petitioners who claim to be job processors doing the job work of cotton/man-made fabrics (supplied to them by wholesale traders on contract basis and returning the same in the shape of colour printing, dying, etc. as per the design requirements of the wholesale traders) challenge the levy of additional duties of excise under the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 (for short 'the Act'). In fact they challenge the very validity of the Additional Duties Act. The petitioners want this court to issue an appropriate writ or direction restraining the respondents from levying and collecting the additional duties of excise which levy they say is ultra virus Article 366(29A) read with Articles 246 and 274 of the Constitution and the petitioners also seek quashing of the notifications dated November 25, 1987 (No. 254/87), December 9, 1987 (Nos. 260 to 262/87), January 19, 1988 (Nos. 4-5/88) ...
Madan Mohan Prasad Vs. State (Delhi Administration)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-1991
Reported in: 1991(3)Crimes302; 45(1991)DLT191
V.B. Bansal, J.(1) Madan Mohan Prasad, Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines Government of Bihar, Patna, was tried by Special Judge, Delhi for the offences under Section 161 Indian Penal Code and Sec. 5(2) read with Sec. 5(l)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (for short the Act).(2) The following charges were framed against the appellant on 1 6/07/1979 :- 'FIRSTLY: That on 18.8.77 at C-97, South Extension, Part Ii, Delhi while you being a public servant posted as DeputySecretary, Department of Mines, Govt. of Bihar, Patna pursuant to your demand of Rs. 10,000.00 as bribe from Sh. Viren Pandey,Chairman, South Karanpura Coal Company, 11 British Indian Street,Calcutta-69 accepted or obtained from said Shri Viren PandeyRs. 5000.00 as gratification other than legal remuneration as a motive or reward for doing a favor to him to wit, manipulating in favor of the South Karanpura Coal Company Ltd. to operate Bundu Colliery and create circumstances favorable for the vacation of the order of...
Neelam Anand and ors. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-1991
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT32
Santosh Duggal, J. (1) This revision petition is directed against an order passed by the Additional District Judge, Delhi in M.C.A. No. 63 of 1989 on 7th March, 1989 whereby the appeal was dismissed against 'the order dated 17th February, 1989, in so far as the alleged threatened action of the respondent Corporation in respect to sealing of property No. 2846-48, Partap Market, Sadar Bazar, Delhi was concerned. When this revision petition was filed, it was asserted, inter alia, that the property against which the action was threatened is an old construction and that it existed for years so much so that vide survey report dated 23rd November, 1983 it was recorded that this property consisted of one shop on the ground floor, one shop on the first floor, one shop on the second floor and one shop on .third floor. It was on this assertion that it was contended that the proposed action of the Corporation in sealing the property and thereafter proceeding with demolition was unauthorised, and i...
Gargi Khosla and ors. Vs. S.S. Walia
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-1991
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT89
S.N. Sapra, J.(1) The present revision petition, filed by the owners/ landlords, under proviso to sub-Section 8 of Section 25-B of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, hereinafter called the Act, is directed against the order dated April 20, 1987, whereby. Learned Additional Rent Controller, Delhi, dismissed the petition of Shri R.K. Khosla, predecessor-in-interest of present petitioners, for eviction of respondent/tenant. (2) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are as under :- Petitioners are the legal representatives and heirs of late Shri R.K. Khosla, who was the owner of the residential house, bearing municipal No. R-21, Greater Kailash, Part-1, New Delhi, comprising of drawing-cum-dining room, 3 bed rooms with attached baths, a kitchen, store, a garage and 2 small servant rooms, with attached lavatory above the garage. With effect from October 1, 1973, Shri R.K.Khosla, let out the entire house to respondent on the monthly rent of Rs. 1,400.00. No written agreement was executed between ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Industrial Finance Corporation of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-09-1991
Reported in: [1992]198ITR539(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. This judgment will dispose of Income-tax References Nos. 235 of 1975, 236 of 1975 and 260 of 1978, which pertain to the assessment years 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71.2. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has stated the case and referred questions of law under Section 256(1) to this court at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax. The assessed is a statutory corporation set up under the Industrial Finance Corporation Act for the purpose of making medium and long-term credits easily available to industrial concerns of India, particularly in circumstances where normal banking facility is inadequate and recourse to method of capital issue is impracticable. The main source of the assessed's income is interest on loans granted to industrial concerns in India. It also earns dividend, commission, interest and commitment charges on unutilised loans.3. For the years in question, the assessed claimed before the Income-tax Officer relief under Section 80M of its inter-corp...
Glaxo India Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-1991
Reported in: (1992)(37)ECC33
1. Short question involved is whether the product 'Complan' manufactured by the appellants herein can be classified under s. No. 14 of Notification No. 17/70 dated 1-3-1970 which gives a list of dutiable items under Tariff Heading 1B of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff.2. In order to appreciate the controversy we reproduce below the Tariff Entry 1B as well as relevant extracts from Notification 17/70 dated 1-3-1970 :- 1B Prepared or preserved foods put up in unit containers and ordinarily intended for sale including preparations of vegetables, fruits, milk, cereals, flour starch, birds, eggs, ... the Central Government hereby exempts prepared or preserved foods falling under Item No. 1B of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), other than those specified in the Schedule hereto annexed from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon :- 12. Skimmed milk powder but excluding such powder specially prepared for feeding of infants; 13. Condensed m...
Rawat Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-1991
Reported in: 1992(22)DRJ226
(1) The question for determination in this appeal against the order of the State Commission of Rajasthan is whether the Insurance Cover Note dated 18th June) 1988 was ctually issued after the accident to the vehicle which it insured or was it issued on the 16th of June, 1988 as stated in the Cover Note(2) After a comprehensive examination of the oral as well as documentary evidence, the State Commission of Rajasthan has come to conclusion that the Cover Note on the basis of which liability is sought to be fastened on the Respondent (Insurance Company), was not issued on 16th June, 1988 but that it was issued subsequently after the accident.(3) The sallent facts are that a car was purchased by the Appellant- Complainant from the manufacturer M/s. Hindustan Motors Ltd. Calcutta. The Gate Pass for the vehicle was issued by the manufacturer on 15th June, 1988. The vehicle was issued a temporary registration certificate on 16th June, 1988 and insurance is an essential precondition for grant...
Kant Kumari Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-1991
Reported in: 44(1991)DLT694
B.N. Kirpal, J.(1) This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by one of the co-owners of Bungalow No. 5, Sikhadera Road, New Delhi wherein it is, inter alia, contended that the vacant physical possession of the said Bungalow should be handed over to the co-owners inasmuch as the act under which the said Bungalow was requisitioned has now ceased to be in operation. (2) Briefly stated the facts are that the aforesaid Bungalow was owned by late Sir Hoti Sagar. The property was on perpetual lease and the land measured about 26 acres on which super structure hand been erected. After the death of Sir Moti Sagar, the property was inherited by his son Seth Prem Saga'. It is further averred in the writ petition, and not denied by the Union of India, that after the death of Prem Sagar the said property devolved on his widow, namely, Smt. Kant Kumari, the petitioner and his two sons Seth Shanti Sagar and Vinod Sagar. Both Shanti Sagar and Vinod Sagar have also exp...
Jai Dev Sharma Vs. Ashok Kumar and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-08-1991
Reported in: 45(1991)DLT561
P.K. Babri, J. (1) In this suit the plaintiff has sought relief of Specific: performance of the agreement dated February 20, 1983, with directions to the defendants to deliver possession of the properties shown as marks 'A', 'B', 'C' & Dl 'in plan mark X'. The facts of the case leading to the filing of the present suit, in brief, are that the plaintiff had vide two agreements dated January 20. 1975, agreed to sell 208 Sq. Yadrs Along with the super structure for a consideration of Rs. 14,660.00 in the first agreement and passage 10' X 16' for a sum of Rs. 2500.00 in respect of the second agreement and possession of the aforesaid pieces of land was given to defendant No. 1. It is the case of the plaintiff that . later on, vide agreement dated April 9, 1978, the plaintiff agreed to sell 100 Sq. yards of land to defendant No. I for a sale consideration of Rs. 11, 500.00 but shortly thereafter the said agreement was cancelled and defendant No. 1 on May 16, 1978, executed the receipt of obt...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Essex Farms (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-07-1991
Reported in: [1992]85STC81(Delhi)
B.N. Kirpal, J.(1) The Sales Tax Tribunal has referred. under Section 45 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, the following two questions of law to this Court : '(I)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the turn over of Rs. 27,80,122.34 p. was of sales inside Delhi and did not constitute inter State trade and commerce as envisaged by the Central Sales Tax ? (II)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right that the sales of Rs. 27,80,122.34 p. were exempt from tax under Rule 29(iii) of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1951' The aforesaid reference relates to the assessment year 1970-71 and the facts, as set out in the statement of the case. are as follows : (2) The assessed namely the Essex Farms (P) Ltd.. carries on the business of breeding and purchase and sale of piggeries and other meat products. During the course of the same, it supplied meat etc. worth Rs. 27.80.122.34 p. in that year to Govern...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »