Delhi Court July 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.
inder Kumar Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-21-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ211
ORDER1. By this writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner calls in question his detention under S. 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short 'COFEPOSA'). 2. The facts relating to the detention of the petitioner as given in the grounds of detention accompanying the detention order are as under : On December 21, 1991, three passengers bound to Hong Kong by Air India Flight No. AI-318 were intercepted by customs authorities. The petitioner was one of them. On being interrogated the petitioner admitted to have concealed foreign currency in his rectum. He volunteered to eject the same in the normal way. Thereupon in presence of the witnesses, the petitioner ejected two cylindrical packets which contained US $ 8100, Deutsche Mark 13,500/-, Dutch guilder 4000/-, Saudi Riyal 500/-, Swiss Franc 100 and Japanese Yen 50,000/- equivalent to Rs. 5,08,600/-. On demand by Custom Authorities, the petitioner failed to...
Surinder Kumar Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-21-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ291
ORDER1. By this writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner calls in question his detention under S. 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange & Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short 'COFEPOSA'). 2. The facts relating to the detention of the petitioner as given in the grounds of detention accompanying the detention order are as under : On December 21, 1991, three passengers bound to Hong Kong by Air India Flight No. AI-318 were interpreted by customs authorities. The petitioner was one of them. On being interrogated the petitioner admitted to have concealed foreign currency in his rectum. He volunteered to eject the same in the normal way. Thereupon in presence of the witnesses, the petitioner ejected two cylindrical packets which contained US $ 6700/- equivalent to Rs. 1,70,850/-. On demand by Custom Authorities, the petitioner failed to produce any legal document in support of acquisition and exportation of the foreign currency recovered from hi...
Exportos Apparel Group Ltd. Vs. Vedevel Sizing and Weaving Mills (P) L ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-21-1993
Reported in: 1993IIIAD(Delhi)329; 1993(2)ARBLR173(Delhi); 1993(27)DRJ138
Mahinder Narain, J.(1) Suit No. 1304 of 1993 has been filed by M/s. Exportos Apparel Group Ltd. against Vedevel Sizing & Weaving Mills (P) Ltd., defendant No. 1, and Canara Bank, defendant No. 2. By this suit, the plaintiff seeks perpetual injunction against defendant No.2, restraining it from encashing two Letters of Credit being No. 214/92/EXP dated 27.01.1993 and 242/92-93/EXP dated 05.03.1993, copies whereof are annexed with the is 5630/93 in S.I 304/93 plaint. Both these Letters of Credit are Inland Irrevocable Documentary Credit. (2) Both these Letters of Credit are for paying for goods purchased. Each were for purchase of 30,000 meters of 100% cotton gray sheeting 20x20/52x5298' on table. The price agreed is as per purchase order. (3) It is the case of the plaintiff that Exportos Apparel Ltd., 1, Paras Cinema Building, Nehru Place, New Delhi, had entered into an arrangement with M/s. Vedevel Sizing & Weaving Mills (P) Ltd., Arulpuram, Veerapandi (Via) Tirupur, for the supply of ...
Shakti Behal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-1993
Reported in: 1993(3)Crimes648; 51(1993)DLT354; II(1993)DMC257
Y.K. Sabharwal, J.(1) Shanti Behal, the appellant, by this application seeks suspensions of sentence and grant of ball pending decision of appeal filed by her against the judgment of conviction dated 20th April 1993 and order of sentence dated 21st April 11993 passed by Sh. S. N.Kapoor, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi. (2) By judgment impugned in the appeal learned Additional Sessions Judge has held that the appellant Shanti Behal is guilty for the offences under Sections 302 and 498A, Indian Penal Code . Jagdish Behal, her son, has been found guilty of offence under Section 498A, Indian Penal Code . As regards the offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code , the learned Additional Sessions Judge has awarded sentence of death to Stot. Shanti Behal and has directed that she shall be hanged by neck till she is dead, after confirmation of sentence by this court. As required by Section 366 of Code of. Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') the proceedings of the case against S...
K.C. Goyal Vs. Delhi Development Authority and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-19-1993
Reported in: 1993IIIAD(Delhi)205; 1994(1)ARBLR179(Delhi); 53(1994)DLT141
Sat Pal, J. (1) The petitioner(hereinafter referred to as 'the contractor) was awarded the work of cartage of Bitumen by mechanical transport from Mathura Refinery to various D.D.A. stores within Union Territory of Delhi by the Delhi Development Authority(hereinafter referred to as D.D.A.). Disputes and difference between the contractor and D.D.A. were referred to the arbitration by Shri Banarasi Dass (hereinafter referred to as the Arbitrator) vide letter of reference No. E.M.2(29)85/Arbn/3988-91 dated 25th April, 1985. The arbitrator gave his award on 24th February, 1988. (2) On a petition filed by the contractor under Sections 14, 17 and 29 of the Indian Arbitration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), notice was issued to the Arbitrator for filing the award. Thereafter respondent No. 2 filed his award dated 24th February, 1988. (3) Notice of filing of the award was given to the parties. The D.D.A.has filed objections against the award being is 7184/88 which have been opposed b...
Bijay Singh Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-19-1993
Reported in: 52(1993)DLT15; 1993(27)DRJ17
D.P. Wadhwa, J. (1) This appeal filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short the Act) is directed against the judgment dated 27thJanuary 1984of the Additional District Judge in a reference made to him under Section 18 of the Act. The land in question is situated in Village Jasola. Notification under Section 4 and declaration under Section 6 of the Act were both issued on 31st December 1976. The Land Acquisition Collector made his award on 2nd February 1979 fixing the market value of the land at Rs.7.060.00 per bigha. On a reference under section 18 of the Act, the learned Additional District Judge fixed the market value of the land at Rs. 10.000.00 per bigha. Still not satisfied, the appellants have filed this appeal. (2) When the appeal was originally filed, it was stated that the market value of the land was Rs.30,000.00 per bigha. However, during the pendency of the appeal, the appellants have sought amendment of the memo of appeal now claiming Rs.55,000.00 per bigh...
Ran Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-19-1993
Reported in: 1993IVAD(Delhi)542; 52(1993)DLT377; 1993(27)DRJ325
B.N. Kirpal, J.(1) The challenge in this writ petition is to the notification which has been issued under Sections 4 and 17 of the Land Acquisition Act for acquisition of land in Village Kakrola.(2) The land is proposed to be acquired for planned development of Delhi for the Dawarka (Papankala) Project. It has been explained by the respondents that the land is required for Phase-II of the said project and despite the award having been made on 2nd April, 1993, the entire possession of the land has not been taken over by the respondents because of the obstructions which have been put in the way of the same. It is contended by the petitioner that the notification under Section 4 of the Act is bad in law because there was no justification for invoking the provisions of Section 17 of the Act.(3) We find no merit in this contention. The Dawarka Project has been underway for quite sometime. Allotments have been made to a large number of co-operative societies in Phase-I as is evident from the...
S. Waryam Singh and anr. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-17-1993
Reported in: 53(1994)DLT97
Sat Pal, J.(1) This is a petition under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act for grant of probate of the Will dated 5th August, 1988 executed by late Ms. Jaswant Kaur. (2) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners herein are the brothers of late Ms. Jaswant Kaur. The deceased Jaswant Kaur had executed a Will dated 5th August, 1988 in accordance with law. In the Will itself the deceased had mentioned 9 persons including the two petitioners as her legal heirs. The Will is duly registered with the Sub-Registrar of Documents, Delhi. The original Will itself has been filed Along with petition and the same is Ex.PW 1/1. The schedule of properties and estate of the deceased Jaswant Kaur has also been annexed Along with the Will and the same is Ex.PW 2/2. Along with the petition the death certificate of deceased Jaswant Kaur has been filed and the same is Ex.PW 2/1. The Will of the deceased has nominated S.Waryam Singh Lamba and S. Amarjit Singh Lamba (petitioners herein) as exe...
Hari NaraIn and anr. Vs. Bela Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-16-1993
Reported in: 1993IIIAD(Delhi)88; 51(1993)DLT375
P.K. Babri, J.(1) The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of the Rent Control Tribunal dated 30/03/1990, by which he had allowed the appeal of the landlady and had set aside the order of the Additional Rent Controller dated 1/02/1988, by which the eviction petition brought on the ground of eviction covered by Clause (b) of. proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act was dismissed and the Rent Control Tribunal has allowed the eviction petition and passed the eviction order on the said ground leaving the parties to bear their own costs.(2) The case set up by the landlady, in brief, is that the shop located in premises No. C/30-A, Model Town, Delhi, was let out to Hari Narain but he has, about ten years earlier, sublet, assigned and parted with possession of the said shop in favor of his real brother Jagdish Narain without obtaining any written consent of the landlady. The two brothers filed a joint written statement and pleaded that there has been no s...
Satish Chandra and anr. Vs. the Registrar Co-operative
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-16-1993
Reported in: 1993IIIAD(Delhi)81; 1993(26)DRJ528
Vijender Jain, J. (1) This is a petition filed by the petitioners praying, inter alia, to declare that amended Rule 53 of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Rules, 1973 (for short the Rules) as unconstitutional a(nd consequently any business transacted at meetings pursuant to the said Rule to be,illegal and inoperative. The petitioners have further prayed thatSec.34 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 1972 be declared unconstitutional and ultra virus of the Constitution. Lastly, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus to the Registrar, Co-operative Societies to forthwith appoint an Administrator of the respondent-Society under Sec.32 of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 1972.(2) Briefly stated the facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are that the petitioners were members of The Supreme Co-operative Group Housing Society Ltd. The land to the Society was given on 3rd May, 1983 at Mayur Vihar Phase-I. The Society appointed M/s Raj Rewal as their ar...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »