Delhi Court December 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.
Syndicate Bank Vs. Parerhat Papers and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1993
Reported in: 1994IAD(Delhi)153; I(1994)BC555; 53(1994)DLT46
Sat Pal, J. (1) This suit has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff-bank under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short the Code) for recovery of Rs.II,05,251.10 with interest and costs. Since the defendants could not be served by the ordinary process, the plaintiff filed an application bearing is No. 10473/92 under Order 5 Rule 20 read with Section 151 of the Code for effecting substituted service upon defendants 1 to 3. This application came up for hearing before the Joint Registrar on 4th August, 1993 and the Joint Registrar directed that the aforesaid defendants be served both in the suit as well as in is 8577-78/91 with the summons in the prescribed manner by means of publication in the newspaper 'Times of India' in Delhi edition as well as in the U.P. edition for 10th November, 1993. The case again came up for hearing before the Deputy Registrar on 10th November, 1993 and it has been stated in the order dated 10th November, 1993 that the defendants 1 to 3 have been serve...
S.S. Puri Vs. R. Chander Shekar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1993
Reported in: 1994IAD(Delhi)98; 53(1994)DLT186; 1994RLR179
Jaspal Singh, J.(1) This revision petition raises a question which is increasingly haunting the landlords as well as the tenants of such premises as are seemingly beyond the pale of the Delhi Rent Control Act. (2) As we all know, nothing in the Delhi Rent Control Act applies to any premises, whether residential or not, whose monthly rent exceeds three thousand and five hundred rupees. Suits, thereforee, are filed depending upon whether the Delhi Rent Control Act is applicable or otherwise. (3) In November, 1991, the petitioner, claiming himself to be the owner- landlord of the suit premises filed a suit for possession and recovery of rent for the months of April and May, 1991 at the agreed rate of Rs. 3800.00 per month besides damages at the rate of Rs. 5000.00 per month with effect from June, 1991. (4) In December, 1991 the petitioner moved an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for direction to the respondent-tenant to deposit arrears of rent with effect from...
T.N. Seshan Vs. United News
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-10-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Delhi179; (1994)107PLR71; 1994RLR63
Mahinder Narain, J. (1) This is an application filed by the plaintiff under Order 8 R.I, 0.8 R.5, 0.8 R.10. of the C.P.C., read with Chapter Vi Rule 3 of the Delhi High Court Rules, for pronouncement of judgment.(2) The facts giving rise to this application are that the plaintiff has filed the present suit for defamation, seeking recovery of damages of rupees one crore against the defendant United News Agency, for having published a report which according to the plaintiff, defamed him. (3) The suit was filed on 24.08.1992 and re-filed on 29.8.1992. Summons were issued by the Registrar on 2.9.1992, directing on that date that the matter be listed before the JR/DR on 19.11.1292. It is asserted that despite provision? of Q, 8 R. 1, written state- ment was not filed before the first hearing on 19.11.1992. (4) When the matter came up on 19.11.92 before the J.R., the Advocates were on strike, and the J.R. passed the following order :- The Advocates are not attending the courts today. Defenda...
Dhan Raj @ Dhanni Vs. Administrator of the National Capital Territory ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-10-1993
Reported in: 1994IAD(Delhi)56; 1994(28)DRJ107
D.P. Wadhwa, J.(1) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the order dated 7 August 1993 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, in the exercise of powers conferred upon him under section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (for short 'the N.S.A.') on his satisfaction that it was necessary to detain the petitioner with a view to prevent him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. In pursuance of this order the petitioner was detained on 13 August 1993. We may note that powers for detention under the N.S.A. have been delegated to the Commissioner of Police and extended from time to time. There is no challenge, however, in this petition to the competency of the Commissioner of Police to pass the impugned order of detention.(2) Under the provisions of the N.S.A. the petitioner was communicated the grounds of detention. In the grounds it was mentioned that the petitioner could represent against ais detention to the ...
Shakuntala Sharma and ors. Vs. Maya Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-10-1993
Reported in: II(1993)DMC631
Sat Pal, J.1. This is an application filed on behalf of the plaintiffs under Section 151 CPC with permission to withdraw interest on the FDRs by way of maintenance of the plaintiffs. The case of the plaintiffs is that plaintiff No. 1 is the legally wedded wife of Late Shri Rajendra Prasad and plaintiffs No. 2 and 3 are the children born out of the wedding between Rajendra Prasad and the plaintiff No. 1. Defendant No. 1 is the mother of late Shri Rajendra Prasad and the defendant No. 2 is the daughter out of the wedding between Rajendra Prasad and one Smt. Sushila Devi. The case of the defendants is that there was legally no marriage between late Shri Rajendra Parsad and plaintiff No. 1 and as such the plaintiffs are not entitled to any relief whatsoever.2. Mr. Saini, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiffs has referred to a judgment of Bombay High Court reported in the case of Laxmibai Nagappa Matiwadar v. Laxmibai Nagappa Matiwadar, : AIR1983Bom222 in support of the subm...
Universal Electrical Industries Vs. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-09-1993
Reported in: (1994)(70)ELT279TriDel
1. Both these appeals involve a common issue and are hence heard together and disposed of by a common order.2. The appellants herein are manufacturers of electric toasters, room heaters and also manufacture parts of these two items classifiable under Heading 85.16 CETA, 1985 which were captively consumed by them in the manufacture of electric toasters and room heaters. Room heaters are exempt from the whole of central excise duty vide Notification 160/86 dated 1-3-1986 whereas electric toasters were exempted from duty under Notification 124/88 dated 1-3-1988. In view of Notification 217/86 dated 2-4-1986, parts of electric toasters and room heaters are not eligible for any exemption as the final products viz. electric toasters and room heaters were wholly exempt from duty. The sale invoices for the period 1986-87 and 1989-90 were resumed for examination and it was revealed that the appellants had manufactured and cleared some parts of electric toasters and room heaters viz. elements, ...
Chandi and ors. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-09-1993
Reported in: ILR1994Delhi364; (1993)105PLR1; 1994RLR66
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) This petition has been brought against order of Additional District Judge dated March 7, 1978 passed acting as Court of reference under the and Acquisition Act dismissing the application of the petitioners for being substituted as legal representatives of deceased Durga on the ground that the reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act stood abated as the application was not moved within 90 days of the death of Sh. Durga. (2) Facts, in brief, are that notifications under Sections 4 & 6 of The Land Acquisition Act had been issued for acquiring 365 bighas. 4 bids was of land in Village Bahapur and award was made in respect of some of the acquired land on March 13, 1962 by the Land Acquisition Collector. (3) Sh. Durga was an occupancy tenant on some portion of the land which was owned by Delhi Simla Catholic Church Dioecese. The compensation was granted to Sh. Durga at the rate Rs.25 per sq. yd. Sh. Durga had moved an application under Section 18 of The L...
ingersoll-rand (India) Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-08-1993
Reported in: (1994)(69)ELT737TriDel
1. This is an appeal against the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Water-well Drilling Rigs, construction/mining equipments etc., falling under Chapter 84 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Enquiries made by the Central Excise officer revealed that the appellants were not paying duty on drag bits and drill pipes which were being supplied to the customers along with water-well drilling rigs. During the course of their enquiries, the officers recorded the statements of Shri P.A.Sreekanta, Executive Engineer and K.S. Upadhyaya, Executive of the company who stated that duty was not being paid on drag bits and drill pipes since they were not considered as forming integral parts of the machinery manufactured by the appellants. Thereafter, a show cause notice was served on the appellants on 15-2-1992 proposing to recover under Section 11A of the Act, the differential ...
R. Dinesh Kumar Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-07-1993
Reported in: (1994)(52)LC418Tri(Delhi)
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the Order-in-Original No. 55/88 dated 8.3.1988 passed by the Additional Collector of Customs and Central Excise, New Delhi.2. FACTUAL BACKGROUND: On 7.10.1985, acting on an information the officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, New Delhi proceeded to New Delhi Railway Station and identified two steel trunks covered by R.R. No. 104402 dated 4.10.1985 New Delhi in the name of Sushil Damani from Madras Central Railway Station, addressed to self, which had already been sealed earlier with D.R.I. Seal No. 4. On a watch, Officers found that a person who disclosed his name as Sushil Damani approached the Railway Authorities with the original R.R. to claim the goods and after paying the charges took the clearance of the goods from Railway Authorities claiming that he was Sushil Damani. The said Sushil Damani was intercepted by D.R.I. Officers and was asked to open the trunks. He could not produce the keys of the trunks and, theref...
Amir Chand Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-07-1993
Reported in: (1994)49ITD606(Delhi)
1. The assessee is in appeal against order dated 29th July, 1991 of the learned CIT (Appeals) sustaining penalty of Rs. 27,270 levied by the Assessing Officer under Sections 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961.2. The relevant facts are that the assessee is an individual, engaged in cloth business in the name and style of M/s. Pardesi Emporium, Prop.Shri Amir Chand. His accounting period is financial year. In response to notice under Sections 139(2), the assessee filed his return of income on 24th September, 1985 at Rs. 78,950 including a sum of Rs. 61,000 offered as his taxable income for the relevant previous year.The assessment was framed at Rs. 79,280, the difference of Rs. 330 being on account of difference in balance sheet and charity.3. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had surrendered the sum of Rs. 61,000 as his income in the return consequent to a survey conducted at the business premises of the assessee on 28-1 -1985 under Sections 133A when excess stock of Rs. 28,90...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »