Delhi Court February 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.
Kidarsons Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Hansa Industries P. Ltd. and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-05-1993
Reported in: [1998]91CompCas451(Delhi); 1993(26)DRJ43; ILR1993Delhi109b
Arun Kumar, J.1. Kidarsons Industries Private Limited was incorporated in the year 1963, having its registered office at Allahabad Bank Building, 17, Parliament Street, New Delhi. The company was engaged in business as dealers, importers, manufacturers' representative and agents for various types of iron and steel and other materials. The authorised capital of the company comprised 20,000 equity shares of Rs. 100 each aggregating to rupees twenty lakhs. The issued and paid-up capital as on June 30, 1988, was Rs. 18,45,700, i.e., 18,457 equity shares of Rs. 100 each. The company is a closely held private company as its shares are mostly held by the Nanda family consisting of four brothers and their mother. The names of the four brothers in order of seniority are Mohinder Nath, Narender Nath, Virender Nath and Rajinder Nath. The contest is between Narender Nath on the one side and the other three brothers and their mother on the other side (hereinafter, Narender Nath will be referred to ...
M/S. Super Cassette Industries Ltd. Vs. M/S. Bathla Cassettes India (P ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Delhi237; 1993(1)ARBLR538(Delhi); 50(1997)DLT7; 1993(25)DRJ410; 1993RLR243
ORDER1. Mr. Swatantar Kumar, appearing for the petitioner, at the outset submitted that instead of treating this petition as Revision, it be treated as an Appeal (FAO):2. The point in controversy is with regard to the maintainability of this petition. The submission of the respondent had been thatthe petitioner ought to have filed an application under Order 39, Rule 4 for vacation of the ex parte injunction before the trial court, instead of approaching this Court either in the revision or in appeal. Hence, neither the appeal nor the revision is maintainable in the facts and circumstances of this case.3. In order to appreciate the objection, the brief facts of the case are that M/s. Bathla Cassettes Industries Private Ltd. filed a suit seeking declaration under Section 60 of the Copyright Act (hereinafter called as the 'Act') on the ground of groundless threats extended by the defendants M/s. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. (petitioner herein) and also sought injunction. The allegation...
Super Cassette Industries Ltd. Vs. Bathla Cassettes India (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-04-1993
Reported in: 50(1993)DLT7
Usha Mehra, J.(1) Mr. Swatantar Kumar, appearing for the petitioner, at the outset submitted that instead of treating this petition as Revision, it be treated as an Appeal (FAO).(2) The point in controversy is with regard to the maintainability of this petition, The submission of the respondent bad been that the petitioner ought to have filed an application under Order 39 Rule 4 for vacation of the exparte injunction before the trial court, instead of approaching this Court either in revision or in appeal. Hence, neither the appeal nor the revision is maintainable in the facts and circumstances of this case. (3) In order to appreciate the objection, the brief fact of the case are that M/s. Bathla Cassettes Industries Private Ltd. filed a suit seeking declaration under Section 60 of the Copyright Act (iier.cinfter called as the Act) on the ground of groundless threats extended by the defendants M/s. Super cassettes Industries Ltd. (petitioner herein) and also sought injunction. The alle...
Gurdeep Singh Vs. Munna Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: 49(1993)DLT671; 1993(25)DRJ267
P.N. Nag, J.(1) This revision petition is filed against the order dated 7th May, 1992, passed by Shri T.D.Keshav, Sub Judge, 1st Class, Delhi, whereby the application of the petitioner under Order 37 Rule 4 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 2th August, 1991 has been dismissed.(2) The facts of the case are that the respondent had filed on 10th September, 1990, a suit for recovery of Rs.25,000.00 under the provisions of Order 37 Civil Procedure Code . The suit was decreed by the trial court against the petitioner/defendant and in favor of the respondent/petitioner on the ground that the defendant did not put in appearance within the stipulated period.(3) According to the defendant, be bad put in appearance within 10 days as required under Order 37 Rule 3(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure and it was over sight on the part of the court not to take notice of this fact and, thereforee, he bad filed an application under Order ...
Uttami Bai and anr. Vs. Sukh ChaIn and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: 1993ACJ1078; 50(1993)DLT44
Usha Mehra, J.(1) Uttami Bai & Ors. have comes up in this Court by way of this appeal against the order of the Motor Accidents ClaimsTribunal, Delhi dated 8th October, W5. The Tribum has awarded a sum of Rs. 12,750.00 as compensation on account of the death of deceased.Sardar Ujjagar Singh was husband of petitioner No. 1 and father of petitioners 2 to 5. During the pendency of this appeal. Uttami Bai died.Since the legal heirs were all ready on record, the amended memo of parties was allowed to be filed.(2) The short point in controversy between the parties is that the Tribunal has misread the statement of Public Witness 10 while arriving at the age of the deceased and has misread the statement of the witnesses with regard to the income of the deceased. According to the petitioner, the age of the deceased at the time of his death was 55 years and his income was Rs. 400.00p. m. The Tribunal took the age of the deceased to be 61 years instead of55 years and has applied the multiplier of ...
Jit Ram Sharma Vs. Cyan Chand and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: 49(1993)DLT702; 1993RLR598
P.N. Nag, J.(1) This revision petition is directed against the orderdated 23.12.1989 passed by Shri Y.S. Jonwal, Sub-Judge 1st Class. Delhi where by he has upheld the objections filed under Order 21, Rule 58 readwith Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure on behalf of the respondent No. 2 herein-Shri Lekh Ram.(2) The short facts leading to the filing of this revision petition are that the petitioner-Jit Ram Sharma-filed a suit for permanent injunction against respondent No. 1 herein Gyan Chand on 24.6.1968 restraining him from encroaching upon the private gali in question and raising construction over the same. The said suit was decreed vide order dated 22.9.1971 passed by Shri V.S. Aggarwal, Sub-Judge 1st Class, Delhi. It appears the respondent No. 1-Judgment Debtor-started violating the injunction order and decree dated 22.9.1971 and the petitioner-Decree Holder-filed an execution petition against the Judgment Debtor, viz., respondent No. 1 praying for removal of the alleged encr...
Niraj Kumar Singh Vs. University of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: 49(1993)DLT615
B.N. Kirpal, J.(1) Rule D.B.The petitioner was a candidate for the post of a Lecturer in History in the evening shift of Moti Lal Nehru College (Respondent No. 2).(2) The petitioner as well as respondent No. 5 and other candidates bad applied for the post of Lecturer in History, pursuant to an advertisement which was published in the newspaper. The relevant portion of the said advertisement reads as follows : 'MOTILAL Nehru College (Evening)(University of Delhi)Boento Juarez Marg, New Delhi- 21 Applications on plain paper are invited for the posts of Lecturers in the following subjects in the grade of Rs. 2200-4000.00 plus allowances admissible under Delhi University rules :(1) *History-Two (Permanent)(2) Political Science-One (Permanent)*Essential for posts of Lecturers in History :The candidates are required to teach History of China and Japan,History of United States of America, Modern India and Rise of Modern West.Qualifications:(a) A Doctorate's degree or Research work of an equal...
State (Delhi Administration) Vs. Balroop Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-1993
Reported in: 49(1993)DLT644; 1993(25)DRJ193; 1993RLR211
Jaspal Singh, J. (1) The appeal unfolds a sad spectacle. Here is a Magistrate who convicts and an Additional Sessions Judge who acquits but not by cooling into grip with the issues involved. Law has been the first casualty. (2) Here is the background. (3) On April Ii, 1983 Constable Bal Roop Singh of the Central Reserve Police Forces was on duty at the Jawahar Lal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi. It is alleged that at about 12.00 hrs..without having been properly marched out, be, of his own accord, turned back, left the Orderly Room of the Officer Commanding- without even paying due complements to his superior. Not only that he is alleged even shouted at his Company Commander in highly insolent and insubordinate manner and as such, was awarded summary punishment of seven days confinement to line. It is Claimed that soon after the announcement of the punishment he removed his web belt from his waist and started swinging it violently resulting in injuries on the person of one Prem Singh Deputy ...
Charan Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: 1993(25)DRJ297
Sat Pal, J.(1) In this case the 'Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue vide his order dated 12th February, 1992 in exercise of powers conferred by section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short called 'COFEPOSA') directed that the petitioner Shri Charan Singh @ Veerji be detained and kept in custody in the Central Jail, New Delhi.(2) Without waiting for the order and grounds of detention being served upon him, the petitioner tiled the present writ petition challenging the order of detention. Along with the writ petition, the petitioner has enclosed a copy of the grounds of detention of the same date and a list of relied upon documents in respect of the other co-detenu, namely, Shri Hazari Lal Jain. It has been alleged in the writ petition that the grounds of detention and relied on documents in respect of the petitioner are exactly the same as those of Shri Hazari Lal Jain.(...
i.S. Saini Vs. National Institute of Health and Family Welfare and ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-1993
Reported in: 1993(26)DRJ426; 1993LabIC1475; (1994)ILLJ468Del
Y.K. Sabharwal, J. (1) The petitioner joined National Institute of Health and Family Welfare (For short 'the Institute') in the year 1962 as a Lower Division Clerk (L.D.C.) and was promoted to the post of Upper Division Clerk (U.P.C.) in the year 1965. The petitioner was appointed to officiate as an Assistant in 1960. In 1962, petitioner was appointed as an Accountant on ad hoc basis and continued to work on that post till 1988. With effect from 21st December, 1988, the petitioner was appointed as an Accountant on promotion on regular basis. (2) The Institute, in the year 1981, took a decision to bifurcate the promotion channel to higher posts. Under the recruitment rules approved in 1981 all L.D.C.'S with five years experience and on the basis of seniority were eligible to be promoted to the post of U.D.C.'s. The rules of 1981 introduced bifurcation of service for further promotion from the post of U.D..C.'s could now be promoted either as Assistants or as Purchase Assistants. The pos...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »