Delhi Court September 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.
Sanjiv Gambhir Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-15-1993
Reported in: 1994(28)DRJ62
D.P. Wadhwa, J. (1) This petition is directed against the order of the respondent Delhi Development Authority ('D.D.A.' for short) seeking a restraint on the D.D.A. from barricading the parking area in the place known as Meera Tower, Commercial Complex, Wazirpur Industrial Area, Delhi-52, thereby depriving the petitioner of his right of parking his trucks, heavy or medium vehicles in the area. This area has been marked with blue arrows in the site plan filed with the petition. The area where parking is permitted is shown with red marks. The petitioner's shop premises is shown with green marking. The petitioner took this premises on rent from the owner of the property having a super area measuring 343 sq. ft. on the ground floor at the back portion of- the shop. The actual area of the shop would be quite less. However, that may not be quite relevant. This agreement is dated 27 January 1993 and this shows that the premises of the petitioner are situated in the area called D.D.A. Communit...
Cemento Corporation Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-14-1993
Reported in: (1996)(83)ELT395TriDel
1. The issue involved is whether the product 'LYMPO' which is admittedly a Cement substitute, is classifiable as cement.2. Heard both sides. The appellants have furnished a lot of evidence in support of their claim that 'LYMPO' is a cement substitute and not cement, e.g. the certificate issued by the State Govt. of Bihar under the Quality Marking Scheme which describes 'LYMPO' as a 'Cement substitute' and a certificate from the Director of K.V.I.C. that Lympo is a substitute for cement and that it is a masonary binder but not cement. Similarly, it is pointed out that 'LYMPO' does not satisfy the ISI Standard norm for Portland Cement and that there are separate ISI standards for Cement and for Lime-Pozzolana mixture. National Test House gave a certificate that LYMPO is not cement.3. It is claimed by the Department that the Tariff Entry Cement includes all varieties of Cement and would cover all masonary binders.Further, it is pointed out that LYMPO can be used for all purposes for whic...
income-tax Officer Vs. Dipson and Co.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-14-1993
Reported in: (1994)49ITD125(Delhi)
1. We are disposing of this appeal of the revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee by this consolidated order. The appeal of the revenue is directed against the order dated 30th August, 1989 of CIT(A)-IV, New Delhi and the dispute is relating to expenditure of Rs. 15,000 in respect of discontinued business. The respondent is a firm and had been engaged in the contract business. During the assessment year 1985-86 assessee had disclosed the income of Rs. 1,41,428 in respect of discontinued contract business resulting from arbitration award. The Assessing Officer disallowed the expenditure for two reasons. One is that vouchers but for payment of Rs. 15,000 paid to Mrs. Sudha Kapur, lawyer being daughter of one of the partners, had not been produced by the assessee to support the claim. The Assessing Officer also disallowed the claim on the ground that under Section 176(3A) the entire sum received was assessable to tax and there was no scope for allowing any deduction in resp...
R.K. and Co. Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-14-1993
Reported in: 1993IIIAD(Delhi)1103; 1993(27)DRJ413
Sat Pal, J. (1) In this case M/s. R.K. & Co. (hereinafter referred to as the Contractor) has filed this petition under Section 14, 17 and 29 of the Arbitration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for filing of the original award dated 20th December, 1985 Along with documents and making it rule of the Court. Notice of the filing of the award was issued to the petitioner as well as to the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the D.D.A.). Objections have been filed on behalf of the D.D.A. vide IANo.2892/86 under Section 30 and 33 of the Act which were controverter by the petitioner. The following issues were framed:- 1. Whether the Arbitrator has misconducted himself or the proceedings? 2. Whether the award is liable to be set aside on the grounds taken up in the objections? 3. Whether the award is not liable to be made a rule of the Court? 4. Relief.(2) The parties were allowed to file evidence by way of affidavits. Affidavits have been filed in support and opposi...
S. Gurmukh Singh Vs. Gopi Ram and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-14-1993
Reported in: I(1994)ACC403; 1994ACJ1142; (1993)105PLR84; 1993RLR588
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) This appeal is directed against the award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal by which he awarded Rs. 33,000.00 as compensation to the appellant. (2) Facts of the case are not in dispute that appellant had suffered multiple fractures in the right leg and he remained a patient confined to the hospital for about three months and some treatment also continued till about the date of the filing of the petition. The accident had taken place on 13.2.76 at about 5.15 P.M. The appellant was going on his motor cycle No. Hrc 3823 from his office to his house and when he reached near Naraina Over Bridge, a truck Dll 9230 driven by Gopi Ram in a rash and negligent manner had caused the accident. As these findings are not in dispute before me, so only question which has been argued before me is that the compensation awarded to the appellant is on a very low side. (3) It appears that the medical evidence produced before the Tribunal, particularly the Certificate issued by the doctor, ...
Jasbir Kaur and ors. Vs. S. Sampuran Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-14-1993
Reported in: 1993ACJ1196; 53(1994)DLT134; 1999(27)DRJ502
Jaspal Singh, J.(1) Nostradamus says that world will lend in 1997.For39 years old Harbhajan Singh, an electrician employed with the Statesman on a monthly salary of Rs. 738.80 p., it came to an end on May 3, 1981. On that day he died in a road accident leaving behind seven destitutes - a widow, a mother and five minor children. (2) On a petition under section 110 A of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,08,000.00 as compensation Along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of the petition till realisation. For arriving at the amount awarded the Tribunal presumed that out of his salary the deceased was contributing Rs.500.00 per month towards his family and spending the balance amount on himself. Thus '.he annual dependency was taken as Rs.6000.00 which, for reasons not disclosed, was multiplied with 18 bringing the total to Rs.1,08,000.00 . (3) Aggrieved by the said award the claimants have preferred this appeal. (4) The learned counsel for the appel...
Narender Pal Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-14-1993
Reported in: 1993IVAD(Delhi)301; 52(1993)DLT269
Anil Dev Singh, J. (1) This writ petition calls in question an order of detention dated 18/12/1991 made by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, respondent No.2, under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974(for short 'COFEPOSA') directing the detention of the petitioner with a view to preventing him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the augmentation of foreign exchange.(2) The facts arising from the grounds of detention are :Shri Waryam Singh resident of M-191, Greater Kailash New Delhi was indulging in illegal sale and purchase of foreign exchange and compensatory payments in collaboration with Shri Ravinder Pa! Singh Sethi resident of 20/8 Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi. On 16/08/1991 during surveillance of the letter's residence. Shri Waryam Singh was seen boarding Car No. DL3CB 0397. This car was intercepted on Shanker Road and on search of the person of Shri Waryam Singh and the car the following recovers and...
Kishore Lal Shankar Vs. S. Qureshi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-14-1993
Reported in: 1993ACJ1231; (1993)105PLR79
P.K. Bahri, J. 1. By this order, I shall dispose of the appeal as well as the cross-objections pertaining to the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal dated July 24, 1981 by which the Tribunal had awarded compensation of Rs. 16,246/- with costs against all the respondents before the Tribunal but has limited the liability of the Insurance Company, respondent No. 3, to the tune of Rs. 8,700/- with the direction that if the amount is not paid within 60 days, the amount shall carry the interest of 6% per annum from the date of the award till realisation.2. The learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that the Tribunal had went wrong legally in limiting the liability of the Insurance Company to the tune of Rs. 8,700/- only. He has urged that according to the terms of the Insurance Policy, the liability of the Insurance Company was limited to Rs. 50,000/- and thus, the whole of the amount awarded by the Tribunal should have been made recoverable from the Insurance Company.3. Th...
Gulab Chand Dhot Vs. P.N. Aggarwal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-14-1993
Reported in: 1(1994)ACC325
P.K. Bahri, J.1. These two cross-appeals have been brought against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated August 30, 1980 by which he had awarded a sum of Rs. 51,076/- as compensation with costs against respondent No. 1, Gulab Chand, and respondent No. 2, Jagdish Kumar, and had dismissed the claim against respondent No. 3, National Employees Mutual General Insurance Association. The claimant has filed the appeal for enhancement of the compensation and also for awarding the compensation against the Insurance Company. The owner of the vehicle, which was involved in the alleged accident, has challenged the award on the ground that in fact the vehicle owned by him had not caused the accident and was not involved in the accident at all.2. Facts, in brief, are that on December 26, 1970, at about 6.20 p.m., the claimant Sh. P.N. Aggarwal was injured in an accident with motor vehicle near A-2/1, Model Town, Delhi. It was the case of the claimant that the Car No. DLI 1745 owned b...
Kirpal Singh Khurana Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-13-1993
Reported in: 1993IIIAD(Delhi)953; 1993(2)ARBLR498(Delhi); 52(1993)DLT134
Sat Pal, J. (1) This is a petition filed by the petitioner under Section14 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and it has been prayed that the respondent No. 2 be directed to file the award in Court and upon filing of the some further proceedings be taken according to law. After the award was filed,notice of filing the award was served on the respondent-Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Urban Development, Nirman Bbawan, New Delhi on 2.4.91. The respondents filed the objections on 17.7.91 vide application bearing No. 1A 9137/91. Along with the said application, the respondents have also filed an application bearing No. 9137-A/91 under Section5 of the Limitation Act for condensation of delay, if any. The application for condensation of delay has been opposed by the petitioner in their reply to the said application. (2) Mr. Sanjay Poddar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the objections filed on behalf of the respondents are barred by limitation. He...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »