Delhi Court March 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.
M/S. Thakral and Sons Vs. Indian Petro Chemicals Corporation Ltd. and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Delhi226; II(1993)BC45; 50(1993)DLT561; 1993(25)DRJ479
1. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff for recovery of Rupees 2,08,200/- against the defendants.2. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff is a registered partnership under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, carrying on its business at AT 50/ 3, Baljit Nagar, New Delhi. Shri Des Raj son of Shri Gaila Ram is one of the registered partners and is competent to file the suit, sign and verify the pleadings.3. Defendant No. 1 is a Corporation, engaged in the manufacture and selling of various products including the product by the name of Koylene Waste Wax or 'P.P.Wax'.Defendant No. 2 is the branch office of defendant No. 1 and defendant No. 3 is the Chairman and Managing Director of defendants 1 and 2.4. It is alleged that the defendants had been selling their product Koylene Waste Wax or 'P.P.Wax' at the rate of Rs. 3000/- per metric ton but were unable to clear their huge stock of the water at the above said rate and, thereforee, in order to clear the piled up stock ...
M.S.B. Prasad and ors. Vs. K.M. Sharma and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-02-1993
Reported in: 50(1993)DLT167
R.L. Gupta, J.(1) This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code for short) against an order dated 4.6.92 of the learned M.M. by which he has summoned the petitioners under Section 500 read with Section 34 IPC.(2) Notice of this petition was issued to the respondent. There wasan interim order of stay. I have heard arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the parties. There is a direct ruling now of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of K.M. Mathew v. State of Kerala and Another : 1992CriLJ3779 . Fortunately that was also a case in which the learned Magistrate had summoned the accused person under Section 500 IPC. thereforee, there is absolutely no distinction between the present case and that case.In that case an application was made before the Magistrate on behalf of one of the accused person that assuming the allegations in the complaint to betrue, no offence was made out against that accused. The Magistrate dropped the proceedings against that a...
S.K. Sarawagi and Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Minerals and Metals Trading Corpora ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-1993
Reported in: 1993(2)ARBLR513(Delhi); 1993(26)DRJ124
Arun Kumar, J. (1) This is a petition under Sections 8 and 20 of the Arbitration Act praying that the respondent be directed to file the arbitration agreement and that the disputes and differences mentioned in the petition be referred to an arbitrator to be appointed by this Court.(2) The respondent Minerals & Metals Trading Corporation of India Limited (hereinafter referred to as MMTC) placed an order on the petitioner regarding purchase of 1, 11,000 Mt of Manganese ore. This quantity was subsequently increased to 1,51,000 MT. A contract bearing No. l01/65 was entered into between the parties in this connection on 30th July 1965. The price of the goods to be supplied was fixed @ 83 shillings per M T. Soon after the contract was entered into there was devaluation of the Rupee in June 1966. The supply of Manganese ore under the contract was made after the devaluation of the Rupee. However, the petitioner was paid at the pre-devaluation rate. As a result of this, according to the petitio...
Amar Singh Vs. Ram Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-1993
Reported in: 50(1993)DLT216; 1993(25)DRJ488; 1993RLR318
D.P. Wadhwa, J. (1) These two applications have been filed by the appellants under section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking suspension of their sentences pending the appeals. There are two appellants and two applications. These two appellants, who are brothers, along with their third brother Bhikan, were tried for offences under sections 302/32 Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under section 307/ 34 Indian Penal Code They are alleged to have committed murder of Raju and caused grievous injuries to his brother Onkar. The incident is of 17 March 1984. The judgment is dated 19 September 1992. Bhikan has been acquitted after giving him the benefit of doubt and both the appellants convicted under sections 302/34 Indian Penal Code and 307/34 IPC. They have been separately sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under the first count and to pay a fine of Rs.500.00 and in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months, and on second count they were se...
Mohd. Anis Vs. the Commissioner of Police and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-1993
Reported in: 50(1993)DLT329; 1993(25)DRJ579
Jaspal Singh, J. (1) Between the period 1967 and 1986 Mohd. Anis was involved in as many as nine cases out of which one was under the Arms Act while the remaining under the Indian Penal Code. He was acquitted in all excepting one under section 325 read with section 34 of the Penal Code which was registered in June 1986 and which is still pending disposal. He was also proceeded against twice under section 107 read with section 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure firstly in the year 1989 and thereafter in March, 1992. He was discharged in both. However, in November, 1992 yet another proceeding under section 107/151 of the Code was initiated which is pending disposal. Thus, in the year 1992 he was facing trial in a ease registered in the year 1986 besides proceedings under section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. That very year an order was passed by which history sheet of the petitioner was opened and his name was entered in Register No. 10 of Police Station Chandni Mahal besides...
Balkar Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-1993
Reported in: 50(1993)DLT80
R.L. Gupta, J. (1) Petitioner has been booked under Sections302, 307 read with Sections 34, 147. 148 and 149 Indian Penal Code in Fir 158/90registered in Ps Kalkaji, New Delhi. He applies for bail.(2) I have heard arguments advanced by learned Counsel for theparties. The case of the prosecution is that on 19-5-90 at about 8 00 a. m.Vijay Kumar and three others were traveling in car No. Dhd 3570. They had come from Mohan Nagar. The petitioner is one of the employee in afactory, namely, Punj Lloyd & Co. The car was intercepted on the way by the petitioner and other employees of the factory. They exhorted that the occupants of the car be killed. One Ram Kishan, co-accused had a fiveLt. tin of Kerosene oil. The liquid was thrown upon the occupants of the car. Suresh Kumar was one of the occupants. He suffered from 35% burns and ultimately succumbed to injuries on account of the burns.(3) It is contended that at the most petitioner is charged with exhortation and thereforee, he deserves to ...
P.S. Bhargava Vs. P.C. Kohli and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-1993
Reported in: 50(1993)DLT300
Usha Mehra, J.(1) Dr. P.S. Bhargava in this appeal has assailed the award passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Delhi (herein after called the Tribunal) dated 31/07/1975. The award has been assailed interalia on the ground of inadequacy of compensation as well as on the finding of contributory negligence and for having not given interest from the date of the application.(2) In brief, facts are that on 4/06/1968 at about 4.00 p.m. Dr.Bhargava was going on a Scooter No. DLS-9792, from the library in front of Sri Ram College, Delhi University, towards Model Town, when a bus bearing No. DLP-3472, driven negligently, recklessly and at fast speed hit the scooters after coming on the wrong side. The bus driver was negligent in driving the bus and he was not keeping proper look out. As a result of this accident. Dr. Bhargava sustained compound fracture in his right leg beside other injuries.I Dr. Bhargava was about 60 years old at the time of accident and was working as Lecturer in Engl...
AlbeIn Plywood Ltd. Vs. Janak Kapur and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-1993
Reported in: 50(1993)DLT228; 1993(26)DRJ16
P.K. Bahri, J. (1) This second appeal is directed against the judgment of the Rent Control Tribunal dated November 11, 1987 by which he had affirmed the order of eviction passed by the Controller on the ground of eviction covered by clause (b) of the proviso to sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act.(2) The two courts below have given a concurrent finding of fact that the tenant namely M/s. Albein Plywood Ltd. has sublet the premises to M/s. Sen & Company. (3) Council for the appellant has raised a question of jurisdiction of the Rent Controller in entertaining the eviction petition for want of permission under Section 19 of the Slum Areas (Improvement & Clearance) Act. 1956. He has produced on record a . notification dated April 20, 1957 Sro 1252 issued under Section 3 of the said Act showing that the property in question namely 2155 Desh Bandhu Gupta Road known as 8/4 Desh Bandhu Gupta Road, New Delhi is located in the slum area to which the provisions of the s...
K.B. Vashist Vs. Chief Justice and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-1993
Reported in: 51(1993)DLT90; 1993(26)DRJ317; 1994LabIC1130
Sunanda Bhandare, J.(1) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by an officer of this Court challenging the seniority assigned to respondents 3 to 5 over the petitioner in respect of selection to the posts of Deputy Register made by order dated 3rd September 1990. (2) The petitioner is at present on deputation as Officer on Special Duty to Lt.Governor, Delhi. The petitioner worked as a Superintendent in this Court since the year 1969 till he was appointed as assistant Registrar in the year 1980. In the year 1984 certain posts of Deputy Registrar fell vacant. A Departmental Promotion Committee(hereinafter referred to as the D.P.C.) was constituted. Certain guidelines were prescribed by the then Chief Justice. On the basis of the grading given by the D.P.C., five Assistant Registrars were immediately appointed against the then available posts and a further panel was drawn to meet the future vacancies likely to fall vacant in the near future. The p...
Ram Chand Prithvi Chand Vs. Virender Kumar Mittal and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-01-1993
Reported in: 50(1993)DLT369
P.K. Bahri, J. (1) This is a petition challenging the order ofeviction passed by the Additional Controller dated 19/08/1992. I maymention that the leave to defend application of the petitioner was declined and the eviction order was passed on the ground of eviction covered by clause (e) of proviso to Sub-section 1 of Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act.(2) One of the pleas raised in the leave to defend application was that respondent is not the owner of the flat in question. The respondent had produced Along with his affidavit a photocopy of the memorandum of partition allegedly supplied to him which showed that the flat in question had been allotted in ownership of R. K. Mittal whereas the respondent had filed original memorandum of partition Along with his petition seeking eviction showing that the flat in question, in fact, had been allotted to him in partition amongst four brothers.(3) Originally, the property belonged to H. C. Mittal who died in1988, The respondent is also re...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »