Delhi Court May 1993 Judgments

A.B. Somiari Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 51(1993)DLT180; 1993(26)DRJ583

Sat Pal, J. (1) This order will dispose of both the petitions.(2) The petitioner who is a foreign national is in judicial custody since 20th November, 1988 in the case Fir No. 583/88 under Section 21 .of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, P.S.Paharganj, for the alleged recovery of 500 grams of heroin. The petitioner had applied for grant of bail vide Crl.M(M)2414/91 which was dismissed as not pressed, vide order dated 22nd May, 1992 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court. The learned Single Judge, however., directed the -learned trial Judge to dispose of the case within four months.(3) CRL.M(M) 3381/92, has been filed by the petitioner through Jail for grant of bail on the ground that inspire of the directions given by this Court; the case has not been. disposed of till late.(4) Daring the pendency of the above petition another petition Crl.M(M) 1172/93 has been filed by the petitioner through his counsel for grant of bail or in the alternative to transfer the ca...

Kamlesh Gaur Vs. Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

R.N. Mittal, President: 1. The first submission of the learned Counsel for the Complainant is that the complainant after obtaining guide lines from the respondent installed a 40 KVA generator set and now she is not being allowed to operate it by them. The respondent in such circumstances could not disallow them to do so. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at a considerable length. The question that arises for determination is, whether the complainant is entitled to install a 40 KVA generator set in her premises. The respondent vide resolution No. 68 dated 17th April, 1989 took a decision, permission for the capacity of DG set to be granted may be 20% over and above, the sanctioned load of the registered consumer. The resolution is binding on all the persons who want to install generator set within the municipal area. Admittedly the generator of 40 KVA which is sought to be installed is more than 20% over and above the sanctioned load of the complainant. There is no relia...

Sehjiv Kumar Tandon Vs. Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR1994Delhi202

ORDER1. The petitioner's grievance in this Revision petition are that the point raised by him before the learned Addl. District Judge have not been considered and that the trial Court erroneously imposed the condition while ordering restoration of electricity.2. Petitioner had filed a suit for permanent injunction against the respondent-DESU. Along with the suit, an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with S. 151, Code of Civil Procedure was also filed. After hearing the parties the learned Sub Judge prima facie came to the conclusion that the electricity be restored, however, it was subject to petitioner depositing 50% of the demand raised by the respondent-DESU and for balance amount to furnish guarantee. It was against this imposition of the condition that petitioner preferred the appeal. The appellate Court after going through the record prima facie came to the conclusion that the respondent should consider of sanctioning 42 KW electricity connection in favor of the peti...

Texmaco Limited Vs. Union of India

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1993(2)ARBLR105(Delhi); 52(1993)DLT17; 1993(27)DRJ602

C.M. Nayar, J. (1) This is a petition under Sections 8 and 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, for direction that the arbitration Agreement contained in Contract No.NG/CPG/MC/S-G/2/AGLT dated 8/1/1983, be filed in this Court and respondent be directed to give a panel of three persons, from whom the petitioner may choose as the sole Arbitrator,within such time, as may be fixed and the disputes and differences, set out in paragraph 25 of the petition, be referred to the said sole Arbitrator, in accordance with the arbitration clause.(2) The petitioner is a company, incorporated under the Companies Act, having its registered office at Belgharia,Calcutta. Shri P.K.Ray is the General Manager (Marketing-Structural ) of the petitioner and fully conversant with the facts of the case. It is contended that he was authorised to institute the present suit and sign and verify the pleadings by a Power of Attorney dated April 24,1989. The Government of India through its agent National Hydro-electric pow...

Sinoh Sarohi Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1994CriLJ82; 1993(3)Crimes684; 51(1993)DLT64; 1993RLR544

Sat Pal, J.(1) This is a petition for grant of bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure.(2) Mr. Naseem, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that according to the prosecution case, complainant JugalKishore was abducted by the accused with a view to extort money from him by putting him in fear of death. He, thereforee, submitted that in terms of the allegations, the petitioner could be charged under Section 386 Indian Penal Code and not under Section 364 Indian Penal Code He further submitted that under Section 386 Ipc, maximum punishment provided is up to 10 years and fine. The learnedcounsel, thereforee, contended that since the maximum punishment provided for Section 364 Indian Penal Code is 10 years, the challan was required to be filed within 60days from the date of arrest, but since the challan was filed beyond 60 days,the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail in terms of proviso under Section 167(2) Code of Criminal Procedure. In sup...

Kishori Lal and ors. Vs. Estate Officer and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 51(1993)DLT45; [1994(68)FLR235]

Vijender Jain, J. (1) This order will dispose of Civil Writ PetitionsNos. 3145/85, 25 & 893/86 and 182/87.(2) The petitioner was employed as Electrician by the erst-while Delhi Electric Supply & Traction Company Limited in the year 1942. The service of the petitioner was taken over by Delhi Central Electric Power Authority in the year 1948. On the formation of Delhi State Electricity Board with the introduction of Electricity Supply Act. 1948 the service of the petitioner was transferred to the Board on the same terms and conditions.The petitioner states that with the introduction of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 on 1/04/1958 the service of the petitioner was transferred to Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking (Respondent No. 2 herein) a statutory body of the Delhi Municipal Corporation. Pursuant to a policy of the Government of India in the year 1934 which according to the petitioner provided accommodation for low income group, the erst-while Delhi State Electricity Board raised ...

Ram Shankar Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1994CriLJ452; 51(1993)DLT65

Sat Pal, J. (1) This is a petition for grant of bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.(2) In this case Fir 223/91 was registered at Police Station Kotia Mubarak Pur under Section 20/61/85 of the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (in short the Act) against the petitioner for the alleged recovery of 150 grams of Charas which was in the from of stick.(3) Mr. Paul. the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that in the present case there is a violation of Section 50 of the Act inasmuch as notice under Section 50 served on the petitioner does not bear the signatures of any witness. He further submitted that there is a violation of Section 55 of the Act also as the samples were not taken in the presence of the Magistrate. He further alleged the violation of Section 57 of the Act on the ground that the report regarding arrest and seizure was not sent to the immediate official superior. In support of his contentions, the learned Counsel r...

Arvinder Singh Khanna Vs. B.S. Thakur, Inspector (Custom)

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1994CriLJ287

ORDER1. This a petition for grant of bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that the petitioner submitted documents for clearance of consignment which arrived to Inland Container Depot, Pargarti Madan, New Delhi, from Singapore v. Madras on 7th July, 1990 which on checking was found to contain silver weighing 4000 Kgs. valued at Rs. 2,66,000/- and compressors valued at Rs. 57,72,000/-. It is further alleged that the documents were found to be bogus and after presenting the documents, the petitioner slipped away and went underground and was arrested by CBI in another case. Later on he was taken in custody in this case while he was in jail. It is also alleged that the statement of the petitioner under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1968 (in short the Act) was recorded wherein he admitted this involvement in the fabrication of the documents with the knowledge that the contraband articles have been smuggled. 3. Shri Harji...

Bakshi Sachdev (D) Vs. Concord (i)

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1993RLR563

Arun Kumar, J.(1) [ED. facts.: Plaintiff had let out tenanted premises to Deft. no. 4, a company of Defts. 2 and 5 on 19 6.74 @ Rs. 6000.00 p.m. After a few months Deft. no. 1 was accepted as tenant on same terms. Deft. no. 1 was mostly owned by Deft. no. 2 and in the tenanted premises Deft. no. 2 was residing with family members. Plaintiff on 12.12.88 gave notice terminating tenancy asking possession by last day of the month. Plaintiff on 10.3.89 filed suit for possession and asked mesne profits, after termination of tenancy and on expiry of notice period, at market rate of premises at Rs. 50,000.00 p.m. Defts. 4 & 5 filed W/S in March, 90 saying that tenancy had been transferred in the name of Deft. no. 1 and they had no interest. Defts. 1 to 3 did not file W/S until 17.8.90 when their defense was struck out. They appealed to D B. and meanwhile filed W/S so that they could tell D.B. that W/S had been filed. D.B. allowed W/S to be taken on record upon heavy costs. They contended that ...

Raj Kumar Gupta Vs. Union of India

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1994CriLJ188; 51(1993)DLT47

Sat Pal, J.(1) This is a petition for grant of bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code.(2) The case of the prosecution is that the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (Hqrs.), New Delhi, received an intelligence report that one consignment which was being imported in the name of Mr. Khalid A1 Shorbaji. Attache, Embassy of State of Palestine, contained contraband gold.Accordingly, the said consignment was thoroughly examined in the presence of said Diplomat which resulted in the recovery and seizure of 300 foreign marked gold biscuits of 10 tolas each from the cooking range and 200 foreign marked gold biscuits of 10 tolas each from the washing machine. In his detailed note dated 25/01/1992 Mr. Khalid stated that Trilochan Singh Khurana arranged the import of these goods but he denied the knowledge of ownership of 500 gold biscuits.(3) It is alleged that the statement of Trilochan Singh Khurana was recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act. 1962 (for short called 'the A...