Delhi Court January 1993 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.
Arun Madan Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-18-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1493; 1993(1)Crimes599; 49(1993)DLT463; 1993(25)DRJ101; ILR1993Delhi163; 1993RLR138
ORDER1. The common question that arises for consideration in all these cases is : whether a person can make an application to the High Court for anticipatory bail under section 438of the Code of Criminal Procedure after making a similar application under the same section to the Court of Session without success. 2. Mr. R. D. Jolly and Mr. R. K. Bahri, learned counsel who appeared on behalf of the State, submitted that the language of Section 438clearly shows that the remedy for grant of bail to a person apprehending arrest is that either he can approach the High Court or the Court of Sessions and remedy being alternative, a person whose application for bail under section 438has been rejected by the Court of Sessions, is not entitled to approach the High Court for the same purpose. In support of their contentions they placed reliance on a judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in Malla Ramarao v. State, . 3. On the contrary, Mr. B. R. Handa, Senior Advocate and Mr. I. U. Khan, Advocate, a...
Reena Bose Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-18-1993
Reported in: 50(1993)DLT295
D.P. Wadhwa, J.(1) The petitioner claiming herself to be President of the Indian Nursing Council (I.N.C.) has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for a writ direction or order striking down an office order dated 24-3-1992 of the respondents, or in the alternative calling upon the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue as President of the I.N.C. There are two respondents. First respondent is represented through the Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and second respondent is Mr. R.K. Sood, Vice President, I.N.C., who at the time of filing this writ petition was also working as Acting President of I.N.C. The impugned letter is of the first respondent addressed to the Secretary, I.N.C.,with copies both to the petitioner and the second respondent. In this letter it was stated that petitioner ceased to be the President of the I.N.C. w.e.f. 7/01/1992 on cessation of her membership u/Sec.3(1)(m) of the Indian Nursing Council Act, 1947 (for s...
Chameli Devi Vs. G.C. JaIn and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-18-1993
Reported in: 49(1993)DLT506; 1993(25)DRJ91
P.N. Nag, J. (1) In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 20th September, 1974 passed by Shri G.C. Jain, Assistant Commissioner (Slum) whereby permission has been granted by him to the respondent-landlord under Section 19(l)(a) of the Slum Areas (Improvement & Clearance) Act (hereinafter called the 'Act') to institute eviction proceedings against his tenant Smt. Chameli Devi (petitioner herein), in respect of one room, 2 Kolkies, portion of Chhatti, court yard, latrine and terrace on the roof in common with other tenants in house No.548, Katra Asharfi, Chandni Chowk, Delhi. (2) No appearance has been put in on behalf of the respondent-landlord. Mr. Aggarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that in respect of this very pre uses, earlier a similar petition was filed by the same landlord against the petitioner before Shri D.K. Poddar, Competent Authority appointed under the Act, which was d...
N.K. Rustogi Vs. K. Gupta and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-18-1993
Reported in: 49(1993)DLT548; 1993(25)DRJ88; 1993RLR186
Usha Mehra, J.(1) In this petition, the petitioner, a tenant has raised a very important and interesting point pertaining td the interpretation of the word 'built a residence' appearing under Section 14(1)(hh) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter called as 'the Act'). The petitioner was allotted a flat by the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter called the 'DDA') under its Self Financing Scheme (hereinafter called as 'SFS'). The question for consideration is whether this flat allotted by the Dda would amount to building a residence by the petitioner? Can he seek the exemption stipulated under Section 14(1)(hh) of the Act? (2) In order to appreciate the arguments, in brief the facts relevant and admitted for determination of this issue are that petitioner was inducted as tenant on the ground floor premises bearing No.A-75, Ashok Vihar Phase Iii Delhi vide agreement dated 15th June, 1978 for residential purposes on monthly rent of Rs.l200.00 . Respondent be rein is the landlord...
Bank of Madura Ltd. Vs. State Bank of Patiala and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-1993
Reported in: 1993(25)DRJ99
P.N. Nag, J.(1) This revision petition is directed against the order dated February 22, 1989 passed by Shri Padam Sirigh, Additional District Judge, Delhi whereby he has dismissed the application of the petitioner-defendant No. I filed under Order 9 Rule 7 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the ex parte proceedings against Bank of Madura, defendant No.1., vide order dated ; 5.10.1988. (2) According to the petitioner, the matter was listed before the trial court on 5.10.1988 for plaintiff's evidence. Counsel for the petitioner-defendant No.1 appeared before the Court in the morning but since the Court was on first half day's leave, the matter was .adjourned to after 2.00 P.M. The matter was thereafter taken up by the Court after 2.00 'P.M. but counsel for the petitioner could not put in appearance at the time of bearing as he was busy in some other Court. On the next date, i.e., 22.10.1988, when counsel for the petitioner appeared before the trial cou...
Gulshan Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-1993
Reported in: 1993IIIAD(Delhi)601; 1993CriLJ1525; 49(1993)DLT619; 1993(25)DRJ201
Anil Dev Singh, J.(1) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Judge dated January 5,1988, whereby he convicted the appellant under Section 302 Indian Penal Code for committing the murder of his brother, Harish Chand and sentenced him to life imprisonment. Besides, he also convicted the appellant under Section 324 Indian Penal Code for causing injuries to his father and sentenced him to two years rigorous imprisonment on this count. Both the sentences have been made to run concurrently.(2) The prosecution has set up the following case against the appellant.(3) Harish Chand, the deceased was married to Kiran Bala in the year 1983. After few months of marriage, the couple rented a separate residential accommodation as the parents of Harish Chand on the one hand and the newly weds on the other were not getting along well. Initially they stayed at Subash Nagar and subsequently in Hari Nagar, New Delhi. It seems that Harish Chand was financially hard...
N.K. Chaudhary Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-14-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1467; 49(1993)DLT455; 1993(26)DRJ62
ORDER1. By this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks the quashing of detention order dated 17-12-1991 under S. 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act (COFEPOSA Act for short) by the second respondent Sh. Sikander Khan, Joint Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi against the petitioner. The brief facts are that on the basis of information supplied by one Kamal Aggarwal, premises No. 41, Elgin Road, Calcutta, Flat No. 2B was searched. Four documents and Hongkong dollars 90 were allegedly recovered from that premises. The petitioner resides in that flat. After recovery, statement of the petitioner was recorded under S. 108 of the Customs Act on several dates between 19-7-91 and 14-8-91. After finding sufficient material the impugned detention order was passed. 2. The petitioner has challenged the detention order on a number of grounds. During the course of ar...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. L. Bansi Dhar and Sons
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-14-1993
Reported in: (1999)157CTR(Del)344
B.N. KIRPAL, J.In respect of the asst. yrs. 1971-72 and 1972-73, at the instance of the assessed, the following two questions have been referred to this Court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 2,49,874 received by L. Bansi Dhar from the insurance policy covering the risk to the life of his father L. Murlidhar is correctly treated as ancestral property of the HUF of which L. Bansi Dhar is the Karta and not the individual property of L. Bansi Dhar ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, dividend income amounting to Rs. 13,330 earned by L. Bansi Dhar from shares of Bharat Ram Charat Ram (P) Ltd. held in the name of L. Bansi Dhar. is correctly treated as belonging to the HUF of which L. Bansi Dhar is the Karta and not to the individual, L. Bansi Dhar ?'2. At the instance of the CIT, in respect of the same years, the following two questions have been referred :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the c...
Court on Its Own Motion Vs. Vishnu Pandit and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2025; 1993(2)Crimes84; 1993(25)DRJ209; ILR1993Delhi181b
ORDER1. This matter arises out of suo motu court action in calling upon the two respondents as to why their applications for their release on bail be not rejected. They are accused of offences under Sections 366/376/342/506/34, Indian Penal Code. By two separate orders the learned Additional Sessions Judge had released both the respondents on bail. The order of this Court issuing show cause notice is dated 21 November 1992 and it is appropriate to set out that order in full showing the circumstances as to why the court thought it fit to take suo motu action :- 'It appeared in the national newspapers that the respondent Vishnu Pandit had been arrested for having allegedly committed rape on a 35 year old wife of an accountant working in D.D.A. His driver Baljeet was also taken into custody by the police. The allegations were that the woman was raped twice by Vishnu Pandit, first in front of her 15 years old son and at that time when Vishnu Pandit was molesting the woman his driver Baljee...
Jhalani and Co. Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-1993
Reported in: (1993)45ITD67(Delhi)
1. These are the two appeals relating to the assessment year 1985-86.One by the assessee and the other by the revenue. Though both the appeals relate to different matters but since they pertain to the same assessee and same asst. year, it would be appropriate to dispose of both of them by a common order.2. to 10. [These paras are not reproduced here as they involve minor issues.] 11. Appeal No. 357/DEL/1989 has been filed by the revenue on the following ground:- On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 13,25,662 on account of accrued commission.The main Source of income of the assessee appears to be commission received from M/s. Gedore Tools India (P.) Ltd., which is now described as Jhalani Tools (India) Pvt. Ltd. The accounting period of the assessee is said to be July to June. The appellant had been disclosing income from commission on accrual basis and, was, therefore, following the mercantile syste...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »