Delhi Court October 1992 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.
Brij Mohan Vs. Sripal Jain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-1992
Reported in: 49(1993)DLT543; 1992(24)DRJ450; 1993RLR190
R.L. Gupta, J.(1) This revision petition has been filed by tenant against the order of eviction dated 293.1985 in favor of the respondent-landlord by the Addl. Rent Controller, Delhi (ARC). The landlord had filed an eviction petition against the petitioner in respect of a room and a Kotha on the first floor in House No.1331, Vaid Wara Maliwara, Delhi on the ground of bona fide personal necessity. Regarding necessity the landlord stated in para 18(a) of the petition that he had let out the premises for residential purposes. He had a small share in House No.2208, Kucha Alam Chand, Delhi where he had only two small rooms. His third son Ashok Kumar resided in those two rooms with his wife and three children. The landlord himself had two rooms, one Kotha and one kitchen in premises No.1331, Vaidwara, Maliwara, Delhi on the first floor and had no other residential accommodation in Delhi. The aforesaid portion was quite insufficient for his residence and the family members dependent upon him....
Kamla Marwah Vs. Kapur Fabrics
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-1992
Reported in: 48(1992)DLT636; 1992RLR545
Santosh Duggal, J.(1) The appellant, who is owner/landlady of the demised premises, comprising of drawing-cum-dining room, two bed rooms with attached toilets, kitchen, garage on the ground floor, bed room with attached toilet and servant room above garage on the first floor, built on plot No. D-29, defense Colony, New Delhi, had sought eviction of the respondent No. I/tenant by invoking the provisions of Clauses (e), (d), (h) and (k) of the proviso the Section 14(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (for short the Act). As per averments in the eviction petition, the tenancy premises formed part of a residential house, and had been let to the respondent for residential purposes, but no one was residing in the premises and further that the tenant had acquired vacant possession of a quarter for residence, and had converted the letting purpose of residential into commerical, by using the demised premises as a show-room of furnishing fabrics .and boutique, without prior and written conse...
Mr. Vishwanath Alias Pappu Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1560; 49(1993)DLT409; 1993(25)DRJ9
ORDER1. In all these writ petitions the common ground urged for assailing the order of detention is non-application of mind by the detaining authority. thereforee, these writ petitions were heard together and disposed of by one common order. Detention order was passed against the petitioner on 29th January, 1992 under S. 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter called as the 'COFEPOSA Act'). The impugned order was passed with the view to preventing him from engaging and keeping smuggled goods and dealing in smuggled goods other wise than by engaging in transporting or concealing goods in future. Along with the detention order the grounds of detention were also supplied to the petitioner. 2. The facts germane to the present petition are that on the intervening night of 5th/6th January, 1992, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence searched the godown of the petitioner situated at Rewari Road, Village Surana, Narnaul, Dist...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Modi Industries Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-1992
Reported in: (1993)109CTR(Del)9
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. This judgment will dispose of the aforesaid reference. Income-tax Reference No. 74 of 1982 is in respect of the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67, while I.T.R. No. 71 of 1982, is in respect of the year 1967-68. The point involved in both the cases pertains to the computation of the annual letting value, though the questions of law have been differently worded. In respect of the assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67 (I.T.R. No. 74 of 1982), the question of law referred is as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally right in coming to the conclusion that the bona fide annual letting value of the property in question was Rs. 9,133 in the assessment year 1965-66 and Rs. 11,741 in the assessment year 1966-67 ?' 2. In respect of the assessment year 1967 71 i tr 1982, the question of law referred is as follows : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the inco...
Union of India Vs. Randhir Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-1992
Reported in: 49(1993)DLT537
D.P. Wadhwa, J.(1) All these appeals have been filed by the Union of India. The challenge is not to the award of compensation but to the applicability of Sections 23(l-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (for short 'the Act') as introduced in the Act by the Land Acquisition(Amendment) Act, 1984 (for short 'the Amending Act') which came into force on 24/09/1984 but the provisions aforesaid were nevertheless made applicable from 30/04/1982 when the bill of the Amending Act was introduced in the Parliament.(2) In R.F.A. 854/89 notifications under Sections 4, 6 and 17 were all issued on 19/04/1979 and it was stated that possession was taken perhaps some time in May 1979. The record does not show as to on which date the possession was taken. The award by the Collector was made on 18/08/1980 and judgment by the Additional District Judge on reference made under Section 18 of the Act was given on 29/10/1987. The learned Additional ^District Judge said that since the matter retard...
N. E. I. Projects (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-1992
Reported in: (1993)109CTR(Del)76
P. K. BAHRI, J. :Vide this judgment we propose to dispose of the aforesaid four writ petitions which seek quashment of similar orders made by Dy. CIT (Asstt.) Special Range-16, issued under s. 195(3) of the IT Act, 1961, but making it clear that the certificates so issued shall not cover any sum in the nature of fees for technical service or on account of expatriate supervision charges under the contract/agreement dt. 10th October, 1982, entered into between petitioner and National Thermal Power Corporation-respondent No. 5 (for short NTPC). These orders pertain to financial years 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91 and 1991-92.2. The petitioner admittedly is a non-Indian (foreign) company incorporated in England and has a branch functioning in Delhi since 1983 situated at A-3, Qutab Hotel New Delhi and said branch is 'permanent establishment' of the petitioner company within the meaning of the expression as used in agreement for avoidance of double taxation entered into between United Kingdom a...
Dewan Ram Saroop Deceased Lrs. and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-1992
Reported in: 1992(24)DRJ460
D.P. Wadhwa, J.1. These two appeals filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') pertain to village Khizarabad in the Union territory of Delhi. Notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 3 June 1961 and declaration under Section 6 on 27 October 1961. The award by the Land Acquisition Collector was made on 27 February 1962. He divided the land in two blocks and fixed market value of the land in Block Aat Rs. 4,000/- per bigha and that in Block B at Rs. 2,500/- per bigha.2. In fact there are two different awards. In RFA 288/68 the award number is 1287 and the land measuring 1 bigha 2 biswas, but we are concerned with 4/5th of this land, i.e., 800 sq. yds. in this appeal. In RFA 299/68 the award number is 1283 and it pertains to khasra No. 2/4/1 measuring 10 bids was and in appeal we are concerned with 4/5th of this, i.e., 400 sq.yds. of land.3. The Collector awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 2,500/- per bigha. On a reference made under S...
Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-1992
Reported in: (1993)109CTR(Del)40; [1993]200ITR544(Delhi)
B. N. Kirpal J. 1. In respect of the assessment year 1968-69, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has stated the case and referred ten questions of law, five at the instance of the assessed and five at the instance of the Revenue, to this court. 2.The five questions of law referred at the instance of the assessed are as follows : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the interest of Rs. 17,552 levied under section 220 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was not an allowable deduction under section 37 of that Act 2. Whether, on the facts and the in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in holding that the commission of Rs. 3,000 paid to the bank for the securing guarantee for the payment of income-tax was not an allowable deduction under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 3. Whether, on the facts and the in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in holding tha...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Dayal Singh and ors.,
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-23-1992
Reported in: 1992(24)DRJ454
D.P. Wadhwa, J.1. All these appeals have been filed by the Union of India. The challenge is not to the award of compensation but to the applicability of Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') as introduced in the Act by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (for short 'the Amending Act') which came into force on 24 September 1984 but the provisions afore said were nevertheless made applicable from 30 April 1982 when the bill of the Amending Act was introduced in the Parliament.2. In R.F.A. 154/89 notifications under Sections 4, 6 and 17 were all issued on 19 April 1979 and it was staled that possession was taken perhaps some time in May 1979. The record does not show as to on which date the possession was taken. The award by the Collector was made on 1.8 August 1980 and judgment by the Additional District Judge on reference made under Section 18 of the Act was given on 29 October 1987. The learned Additional District Judge said that ...
Moti Lal Vs. Delhi Administration
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-22-1992
Reported in: 50(1993)DLT4
Mohd. Shamim, J.(1) This is an application by the petitioner for releasing him on bail. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case The deceased Smt. Vandana had been residing with her parents for the last six months the fore her death i.e. on 21/05/1992.1 In any case, according to the statement of her mother Smt. Bhagwati, the deceased had been residing with her parents for the last three months. A compromise was entered into in between the deceased and the petitioner on 1/05/1992As per terms of the compromise the deceased was to re -join the petitioner on 23/05/19921 In the,above circumstances, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the instant case does not fall within the domain of Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and the petitioner is entitled to bail.I He cannot be held responsible for the suicide committed by the deceased on 21stMay, 1992. Hence the petitioner is e...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »