Delhi Court May 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.
Skipper Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-29-1992
Reported in: (1992)106CTR(Del)363
SAT PAL, J. :A complaint was received by the Government of India, Ministry of Industries, Department of Company Affairs from M/s. Jhandewalan tower Flat Buyers Association registered under the Societies Act (for short called the Association) for action against the petitioner-company under s. 408 of he Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the ground that the affairs of the petitioner company were being conducted in manner which is highly oppressive and prejudicial to the public interest. In the complaint it was alleged, inter alia, that (1) M/s. Skipper Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., offered a bid to purchase a plot of land in Jhandewalan in public auction held on 8th October, 1980 for Rs. 9.82 crores on perpetual lease from the Delhi Development Authority (for short called DDA) though its paid-up capital was only Rs. 25 lakhs; (ii) the company started selling flats even prior to the date of auction and continued booking of flats promising completion and hand over po...
Continental Device India Ltd. Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1992
Reported in: (1992)42ITD345(Delhi)
1. to 8. [These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.] 9. Ground No. 3 in the appeal pertains to the disallowance of a sum of Rs. 73,831 made by the ITO by resort to the provisions of Section 37(2A). The AO noted the aforesaid expenditure as having been incurred under the head "Business Promotion Expenses" and treating the same as being in the nature of entertainment, he made the impugned disallowance.10. Before the CIT (Appeals), the assessee did not challenge the disallowance and all that was contended, was that the same be included for computing the disallowance under Section 37(3A). This argument was rejected by the CIT(A) on the ground that since the expenditure was in the nature of entertainment', the same was required to be specifically dealt with under Section 37(2A) and not 37(3A).11. Even before us, similar arguments as advanced before the CIT (Appeals) were tendered. According to the learned counsel, a sum of Rs. 63,059 out of the total expenditure rel...
Shri Kishan Lal Vs. Shri Rajan Chand Khanna
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1992
Reported in: ILR1993Delhi138
ORDER1. This revision petition under S. 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') has been filed by the tenant-petitioner against the order dated 16-7-1991 passed by Smt. Sunita Gupta, Additional Rent Controller, Delhi whereby she has allowed the eviction petition of the respondent-landlord under S. 14 of the Act for bona fide requirement and consequently an order of eviction in respect of Kothi No. 5, Sri Ram Road, Delhi has been passed.2. The relevant fads as stated in the petition are that the respondent-landlord was the owner of the premises in his capacity as the karta of the Joint Hindu Family known as Rajan Chand Khanna & Sons comprising of the respondent-landlord himself, his wife and two sons. The premises Kholi No. 5, Sri Ram Road, Civil Lines, Delhi were let out to the tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 198/- p.m. besides Rs. 26.78 as house tax and Rs.2/-p.m. as sweeper charges for residential purposes and has been used as such since the inception...
Haryana School Education Board Vs. Tilak Raj
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1992
Reported in: 1992(24)DRJ264
B.S. Yadav, J.(1) The appellant. Board of School Education, Haryana (for short the Board) conducts Middle and metriculation Examinations within the State of Haryana. The respondent herein appeared in the metriculation Examination held in March, 1981 and was allotted Roll No. 615347. The result thereof was published in the official Gazette later on. To the charging of the respondent complainant, his result was described therein as R.L. (Result Later) and E (Eligibility). (2) According to the complainant, he ran from pillar to post trying to get his result declared but to no avail. He also made written representations to the Board requesting them to expedite his case and release his result but those also bore no fruit. In January, 1991, he filed a complaint before the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Haryana at Chandigarh claiming Rs. 5,00,000.00 as compensation for the inadequacy of and the shortcomings in the 'service' rendered by the Board. His contention was that had the ...
Chhote and ors., Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1992
Reported in: 48(1992)DLT98; 1992(24)DRJ574
D.P. Wadhwa, J.(1) These two writ petitions can he disposed of by a common judgment as similar questions arise in both the petitions. (2) C.W.P. 279/91 was filed on 21 January 1991. There are three petitioners and five respondents. Petitioners claim to be the owners of khasra No. 448 in Village Gazipur, Delhi. Relying on an earlier decision of this Court in Smt. Gabbe v. Union of India, 1991 R.L.R. 306, the petitioners seek an appropriate writ or direction declaring notification issued under sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') relating to their land as hull and void and of no legal consequence and they also seek a further declaration that the entire acquisition proceedings in relation to their land is illegal and, thereforee, the respondents not entitled to take possession of that land. consequential reliefs are also prayed. On tiling of this petition show cause notice was issued to the respondents as to why rule nisi be not issued and at the same t...
Fedders Lloyed Corporation Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India and o ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1992
Reported in: 47(1992)DLT712; 1992(23)DRJ290; 1993(41)ECC242; 1993(64)ELT380(Del); 1992RLR420
Gokal Chand Mital, C.J.(1) In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the show cause notice dated 27th March, 1986 issued by the Collector, Central Excise under section 11-A of the Central Excise & Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) which seeks to raise the demand of excise duty amounting to Rs. 19.76 crores approximately. (2) The facts of the case as briefly stated are that the petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the manu facture of air-conditioners and refrigerators. (3) For the period prior to 1975, the petitioner company had filed price list as required by Rule 173(c) for the air-conditioners and refrigerators. It was selling its product exclusively through their dealers, namely, M/s. Lloyd Sales Corporation (hereinafter referred to as LSC) and M/s. Lloyd Electric and Engineering Company (hereinafter referred to as LEECO). It may be pointed out here that Lsc and Leeco are allegedly owned by the same family mem...
Krishan Lal Vs. Rajan Chand Khanna
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Delhi1; 48(1992)DLT75; 1992(24)DRJ327; 1992RLR347
P.N. Nag, J. (1) This revision petition under Section 25-B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') has been filed by the tenant-petitioner against the order dated 16.7.1991 passed by Smt. Sunita Gupta, Additional Rent Controller, Delhi whereby she has allowed the eviction petition of the respondent-landlord under Section 14(l)(e) of the Act for bonafide requirement and consequently an order of eviction in respect of Kothi No. 5, Sri Ram Road, Delhi has been passed. (2) The relevant facts as stated in the petition are the respondent-landlord was the owner of the premises in his capacity as the Karta of the Joint Hindu Family known as Rajan Chand Khanna & Sons comprising of the respondent-landlord himself, his wife and two sons. The premises Kothi No. 5, Sri Ram Road, Civil Lines, Delhi were let out to the tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 198.00 p.m. besides Rs. 26.78 as house tax and Rs. 2.00 p.m. as sweeper charges for residential purposes and has been us...
Vinod Kumar Vaidh and Another Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-27-1992
Reported in: 1992CriLJ3674; 1992(23)DRJ247
P.K. Bahri, J.1. Vinod Kumar aged 23 years, Suresh Kumar aged 21 years and Sushil Kumar @ Dabli aged 22 years, have been convicted of an offence punishable under section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed the murder of one Raj Kumar aged 26 years vide judgment dated January 6, 1988 and vide order of the even date have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each and in default to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months each. They have filed these appeals challenging their conviction and sentences. 2. In Lajpat Nagar area there are some hillocks and on one of the hillocks Sant Kabir Ashram is located and in that Ashram there is installed an idol of Sant Kabir on the western side and opposite to it a temple of Shiva is located. On the western and southern sides of Ashram on the slopes, cluster of huts have come up wherein people from low strata of life are residing. Some distance away from the said Ashram o...
Sikander @ Mohd. Shafi Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-27-1992
Reported in: 1992(2)Crimes970; 1992(24)DRJ295; ILR1993Delhi40
Mohd. Shamim, J.(1) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 5.8.91/9.8.91 passed by Shri S.M. Aggarwal learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby he found the appellant guilty under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to death. The learned Additional Sessions Judge while passing the said judgment and order also referred the same to this Court under Section 366 Criminal Procedure Code . for confirmation of the sentence of death as required under the said Section vide murder reference No.3 of 1991. (2) Both the above appeal and reference are being taken up together for disposal as the common questions of law and facts are likely to arise while disposing them of. (3) The case of the prosecution as adumbrated in the statement of the complainant Ghulam Mohd. (Public Witness 1) and the F.I.R. and various other documents placed on record (vide Exts-PW1 /A, Public Witness 8/B and Public Witness 8/C) is as under: that one Ghulam Mohammed who is a resident ...
Modi Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. Lt. Governor of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-27-1992
Reported in: 1992(3)Crimes1054; 48(1992)DLT209; 1992(24)DRJ149; 1992RLR411
Y.K. Sabharwal, J.(1) By public notice dated 2nd March 1978 the Commissioner of Excise, Delhi, invited applications from only the working distilleries for the grant of licenses in Forms CLW1 and L-9, for running the bonded warehouses in Delhi for supply of ordinary spiced country liquor during the period from 1.4.1978 to 31.3.1979. The terms and conditions for grant of licenses, inter-alia, were that the licensee shall be bound to observe Delhi Country Liquor Bonded Warehouses Rules 1976, as amended from time to time (for short 'the Rules') the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 (I of 1914) as enforced in the Union Territory of Delhi (for short 'the Act' and other rules and) regulations framed under the Act and instructions issued by the Excise Commissioner, Delhi, from time to time. The terms also provided that the licensee shall be allowed to import country liquor into Delhi only on execution of a bond for payment of the excise duty on the consignment.(2) M/S.MODI Industries Ltd (Petitioner in ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »