Delhi Court July 1999 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.
Parvesh Kant Vs. Vijay Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-1999
Reported in: 1999VAD(Delhi)765; 81(1999)DLT374; 1999(51)DRJ103; ILR1999Delhi258; 1999RLR468
ORDERVijender Jain, J.1. This revision petition has been preferred against the order of the Additional Rent Controller dismissing the petition of the land-lady. The petition was filed by the petitioner under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act read with Section 25-B of the Delhi Rent Control Act. In spite of service of summons, the respondent did not appear before the Additional Rent Controller nor any leave to defend application was filed within the statutory period. However, learned counsel for the respondent says that leave to defend was filed on 10th July, 1998 after the expiry of the statutory period. This is how the Additional Rent Controller has recorded the proceedings dated 13th July, 1988: 'Despite calls. As per the process server both respondents were served on 12th June, 1998 but despite this, neither of them has filed application seeking leave to defend within the statutory period. As per Section 25-B(4) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, the statements made in the ...
Kishore JaIn Vs. the State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-1999
Reported in: 80(1999)DLT632
ORDERVikramjit Sen, J.1. Both these applications were heard together and can be conveniently disposed of by a single order.2. A suit was filed in this Court claiming recovery of Rs.13,73,718.78 p. being the amount allegedly due to the plaintiff against the 14th, 15th and 16th draws of HIM LAXMI Weekly and HIMLAXMI Bumper for the year 1985. A Written Statement was filed in which the territorial jurisdiction of this Court was not accepted. It is the case of the defendants/applicants that their Advocate had informed them that the case would come up for evidence after six or seven years of the filing of Written Statement and that the Advocate would inform them when the case was listed for this purpose. It is further stated that the applicants had addressed letters to their Advocate seeking advice on the progress of the case, in response to which, by his letter dated. 13.1.1993 the Advocate had informed them that he would make enquiries from the High Court and inform them of the position of...
S.N. Kaul Vs. Amrik Singh and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-1999
Reported in: 81(1999)DLT68
C.M. Nayar, J. 1. This petition is directed against the judgment dated April 30, 1987 passed by Shri S.M. Chopra, Competent Authority (Slum) I, Delhi by which permission was granted to the respondent under Section 19(1)(a) of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to enable him to institute eviction proceedings against the petitioner in a Court of Law. Respondent No. 1 is stated to be owner/Receiver of premises bearing No. 2382-83, Gali No. 12, Beadonpura, Karol Bagh, New Delhi and he sought permission under Section 19(1)(a) of the Act to enable him to institute eviction proceedings against the petitioner-who is alleged to be a tenant in a portion of the said premises. The plea which was taken before the Competent Authority is that grounds of eviction are made out and the petitioner allegedly sub-let the premises to one Ms. Girja and he had the necessary means to enable him to hire an alternative premises because he is an educated pe...
Equipment and Conductors (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-1999
Reported in: 2000(52)DRJ266
Vikrmajeet Singh, J.1. Mr B.P. Aggarwal learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently argued that there was no evidence before the learned Arbitrator which would justified his awarding a sum of Rs 1,01,180.40. It is however not disputed that the respondent had not challenged or stated in the earlier proceedings that no payment has been made by the claimants on accounts of increase in Excise Duly and Sales Tax . In my view, if this payment had not been disputed , there was no obligation or duty on the part of the claimant to actually prove , by filing a certificate of the Chartered Accountant or some other means, that these payments have been made. (No other grounds have been shown on behalf of the respondent which would warrant the setting aside of the award)2. Learned counsel for the U.O.I, has further argued that objections against the award have also been filed on behalf of the claimant and that , thereforee the 'entire dispute should be remitted back to the Arbitrator for fresh...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Aggarwal Pipe Co.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-27-1999
Reported in: [1999]240ITR880(Delhi)
1. The Commissioner of Income-tax has filed this petition under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), seeking a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state the case and refer the following questions for the opinion of this court ;'1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in dismissing Department's appeal against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order cancelling penalty of Rs. 64,136 levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?2. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in facts and law in holding that the Revenue is not absolved from proving means read of quasi-criminal offence when the provisions of law as in force for the assessment year 1987-88 do not require the proving of any means read ?'2. During the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1987-88, the Assessing Officer noticed certain cash credits in the books of accoun...
Universal Industries Vs. Cce
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1999
Reported in: (2000)(68)ECC594
1. The issue involved in this appeal is, whether clearances of goods falling under one heading can be claimed upto the full limit of Rs. 20 lakhs when clearances of the goods under another heading had already exceeded Rs. 20 lakhs for purposes of allowing the nil rate of duty under Notification No. 175/86, as amended. The Department has disallowed the benefit of exemption in respect of clearances of goods falling under one heading which had not yet exceeded the limit of Rs. 20 lakhs demanded thereon on the ground that the aggregate value of the clearances under both the headings had exceeded Rs. 30 lakhs. The learned DR, Shri R.K.Sharma, had contended that the issue is covered in favour of the Department in view of the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Rama Krishna Engg. Works v. CCE 170. The learned Counsel for the appellants has, however, drawn our attention to the Apex Court order in the case of CCE v. Khalsa Pulp and Paper Indus. Pvt. Ltd. reported in 1997 ELT A...
Collector of C. Ex. Vs. A.S. Alloys Ltd.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1999
Reported in: (1999)(113)ELT462TriDel
1. In all these six appeals the short point for determination is whether the respondents are entitled to higher rate of credit on scrap generated out of the breaking of ship imported into country.2. Shri Kulwinder Singh, ld. Counsel appearing for some of the respondents submits that the Tribunal has been consistently holding that higher Modvat credit based on the gate passes indicating higher amount of duty paid on the scrap is admissible to the respondents herein. He refers to the decisions of this Tribunal contained in Final Order No. A/590/96-NB, dated 26-2-1996 in the case of Thapson Steel Ltd., in the case of C.C.E., Chandigarh v. BPL Alloys and G.S. Auto International Ltd. contained in Tribunal's Order No. A/1540-41 /95-MB, dated 2-12-1995 and in the case of C.C.E., Chandigarh v. BPL Alloys Ltd. contained in Tribunal's Final Order No. A/433/96-NB, dated 29-1-1996. Ld. Counsel cites Notification Nos. 62/90 and 60/90 in support of his contention that scrap obtained by breaking of ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Rathod Industries
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1999
Reported in: (2000)(116)ELT549TriDel
1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the Order-in-Appeal dated 8-6-1992 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Pune, is under challenge. The issue for consideration is, whether an assessee who was clearing central excise goods classifiable under two headings/sub-headings could avail of the benefit of small scale exemption upto aggregate value of clearances of Rs. 30 lakh when in respect of one type of goods the clearances had exceeded Rs. 15 lakh and he had started paying the slab rate of duty in respect of such goods exceeding Rs. 15 lakh. In this case, the respondents M/s. Rathod Indus., were manufacturing the excisable goods classifiable under Chapter 84 and Chapter 87. They cleared goods under Chapter 84 upto Rs. 15 lakh enjoying full exemption from payment of duty under small scale exemption. Thereafter they paid excise duty under the slab rate and their value of clearances in respect of the goods under Chapter 84 aggregated to Rs. 29,39,568/-. They wanted to avail full ex...
Prahlad Rai Dalmia Huf and ors. Vs. Sat NaraIn Dalmia Huf and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1999
Reported in: 1999VIAD(Delhi)154; 82(1999)DLT178
ORDERVikramjit Sen, J.1. This is an application under Order 40, Rule 1 for the appointment of a Receiver in respect of the suit property which is stated to be a four storied building consisting of shops and godowns on the ground floor and rooms above, built on Plot No. 123, bearing Municipal Nos. 4099, 4159 and 4099/1 Ward No. III, situated at Burn Baston Road, Naya Bazar, Delhi. In the suit it is prayed for partition of the property and for rendition of accounts. The suit was filed in 1986 and this application was filed one year later and which has been pending for over 12 years.2. Learned counsel for the plaintiff/applicant submits that the property is jointly owned by the parties, and that they have 1/3rd share therein. It is averred that plaintiffs came to know that the defendant No. 2, Sat Narain Dalmia and Defendant No. 7. Seth Om Prakash Dalmia in order to deprive the plaintiffs of the income of the second and third floors have collusively and fictitiously executed some document...
H.P. Vaid Vs. Parveen Soni and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-26-1999
Reported in: 1999VAD(Delhi)52; 80(1999)DLT221; 1999(50)DRJ315
S.N. Kapoor, J.1. In this petition following two questions arise for consideration: 1. Whether the complainant, being an aggrieved person could file the present petition under Article 227 ? 2. Whether in absence of the report of the Probation Officer as required under the proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 4, the respondent could be released on probation by the learned MM? 2. First the facts in brief. Mrs. Praveen Soni/respondent claimed herself to be the tenant of premises No. A-2/37, Krishna Nagar, Delhi under the petitioner Mr. H.P. Vaid at a monthly rent of Rs. 1,000/- excluding water and electricity charges since 1984. Though the petitioner had obtained signatures on various documents of Praveen Soni and husband, the petitioner was not issuing rent receipts. The respondent sent advance rent for the month of September, 1985 through money order which was duly acknowledged but as rent up to 30th April, 1985 by Mr. Vaid in his own writing. She filed a suit for permanent injunction....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »