Delhi Court December 2001 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.
Venus Industries and anr. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2001
Reported in: 95(2002)DLT348; 2002(62)DRJ425; 2002(2)RAJ152
ORDERR.S. Sodhi, J.1. This petition is directed against the order dated 4.12.2001 of the Metropolitan Magistrate, whereby the learned Magistrate has directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Delhi to search and seize the incriminating goods, infringing material, packing tools, dyes, documents, account books, blocks, plates, machinery etc. being used for making the infringing goods or the deceptively similar goods in finished and unfinished respect of the goods/products manufactured by the complainant as mentioned in Annexures 'A' and 'B' of the complaint. 2. It is argued by the learned Counsel for the petitionerthat in the fist place the Magistrate has no power to issue such a warrant in a complaint made under Designs Act since the Act gives remedy which is a civil remedy under Section 22 thereof. He further submits that under the Copy Right Act, Section 15 specifically de-recognizesany design registered under Designs Act, 1911. He, thereforee, submits that without first appreciating...
Cit Vs. Blaze Advertising (Delhi) (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2001
Reported in: (2002)173CTR(Del)482; [2002]255ITR460(Delhi)
S.B. Sinha. J.Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally correct in allowing the expenditure of Rs. 18,823 incurred prior to the accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1974-75 in computing taxable income for assessment year 1974-75 2. Mr. Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessed, raised two preliminary objections in the matter. Learned counsel would contend that in the absence of the order of the Tribunal, passed under section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the court cannot effectively answer the question. In support of the said contention reliance has been placed on CIT v. Bombay Master Printers Association : [1984]146ITR339(Bom) , Mar Thoma Rubber Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1992) 64 Taxman 160 (Ker) and CIT v. ITAT : [1998]232ITR207(Delhi) .He would next contend that in any e...
Common Cause Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Delhi236; 101(2002)DLT28
S.B. Sinha, C.J. 1. In this writ petition, which is in the nature of public interest litigation, the petitioner has highlighted the persisting problem of illicit liquor being sold, smuggled and produced in and around Delhi. In the writ petition, incidence of recent loss of 44 lives in Noida and the State of Uttar Pradesh had also been highlighted. 2. In this petition, the petitioner seeks to remind all about the Surat tragedy, which took place in the year 1991 as also the tragedies, which more often take place during the festival time - Holi, Diwali, etc. 3. The need of the hour indisputably is to take strong measures in this behalf, particularly having regard to the Directive Principles of State Policy, as adumbrated in Article 47 of the Constitution. According to the petitioner, the respondents need to take stringent action to put a complete stop in availability and sale of illicit liquor within the city and see to it that all attempts to smuggle such liquor in and around the city li...
Common Cause (a Registered Society) Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2001
Reported in: 2002IIIAD(Delhi)545; 96(2002)DLT477; 2002(61)DRJ838
Anil Dev Singh, J. 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner calls inquestion the circular dated June 25, 1996 issued by the DelhiDevelopment Authority, based on a decision of the UnionCabinet dated August 1, 1995, to the extent of the reductioneffected in respect of the conversion charges from leaseholdto free hold having not been made applicable to persons whohad already paid conversion charges and in whose favor deedsof conveyance had bene executed earlier to the issuance ofthe circular in question. 14'The averment that the impugned circularexcludes the persons who acted promptly incompliance with the conversion scheme fromtaking the benefits of concession is nottenable on account of the following reasons: a) The conversion scheme being optional, thediscretion of opting for complying with thesame rests with the allotted/lessee. b) Since the decisions regarding grant ofconcessions was pending, it was available tothe allotted/lessee to await the saiddecision. However, if the payments...
irfan HussaIn @ Mazhar Abbas Through His Brother Parvez HussaIn Vs. Lt ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2001
Reported in: 95(2002)DLT440; 2002(61)DRJ386; 2002(146)ELT537(Del)
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order of detention dated 1.2.2001 passed by the Deputy Secretary (Home), Government of NCT of Delhi in the name of Lt. Governor in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3(1) of the Conversation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Lt. Governor has directed that the petitioner be detained and kept in custody with a view to preventing him from smuggling goods in future.2. The grounds of detention dated 1.2.2001 referred to the incident of 4.11.2000 when the petitioner arrived from Hongkong via Singapore and proceeded to the exit gate of the Customs Arrival Hall through the Green Channel are that the petitioner was intercepted on suspicion by the custom officers and from his baggage recovery of 15 polythene packets containing 14.744 Kgs of white powder was made. The petitioner claimed that the said powder was bleaching powder but on Chemical analysis i...
O. Verghese Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2001
Reported in: 2002IVAD(Delhi)216; 2002(62)DRJ143
Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. In the present petition the petitioner claims for a declaration that the service rendered by the petitioner in the Border Security Force (B.S.F.) for the period from 18.9.1973 to 31.3.1982 i.e. prior to acceptance of his resignation, be treated as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefits and also for quashing of the order of respondent No. 2 rejecting the aforesaid claim of the petitioner. 2. The petitioner joined the B.S.F. as a Constable, on 18.9.73. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Sub-Inspector (Clerk) after having qualified in a competitive test and was appointed as S.I. (Steno) through departmental test, on 1.7.79. On 21.8.82, the petitioner sent a letter to the Inspector General, B.S.F. stating therein that he had been thinking in terms of leaving the service for settling certain personal/domestic affairs. It was further stated in the said letter that, thereforee, the said letter might be treated as his resignation letter request...
Mohan Lal Thapar Vs. Y.P. Dabara, Inspector, Customs, New Customs Hous ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2001
Reported in: 2002IIIAD(Delhi)619; 96(2002)DLT317; 2002(61)DRJ874; 2002(82)ECC616; 2002(143)ELT44(Del)
K.S. Gupta, J.1. This order will govern the disposal of Crl.M.(M)3871/2001 filed by Mohan Lal Thapar, Crl.M.(M)3855/2001 filed by Gagan Thapar And Crl.M.(M) 3852/2001filed by Kuldeep Thapar seeking regular bail. Thepetitioners-accused are jointly facing trial in acomplaint filed by Y.P. Dabara, Inspector, New Customs.House under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 (forshort the 'Act').2. Submission advanced by Sh. D.C. Mathur forpetitioners is said Crl.M.(M) Nos. 3871/2001 and 3855/2001which was also adopted by Sh. Harjinder Singh forpetitioner in Crl. M.(M) 3852/2001, was that the offencefor which compliant has been filed, admittedly ispunishable with imprisonment for a term which may extendto 3 years or with fine or with both. Such an offence isgoverned by the third and not second entry in Table II ofthe First Schedule appended to Code of Criminal Procedure,1973, offence being not punishable for a clear period of 3years. Reliance was placed on the decision in RajeevChaudhary v. Stat...
Krishan Kumar Madhok Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2001
Reported in: 2002IIIAD(Delhi)966; 2002(2)RAJ221
V.S. Aggarwal, J.1. On 11th February, 1997 this court made the awarda rule of the court and remitted the disputed partwhich as not appropriately calculated by thearbitrator. The findings of the court are:-'From the above it is abundantly clear thatthe Arbitrator did not work out the amountwhich was payable to the petitioner inrespect of said claims. He left thecalculations to the respondents, which was notright thing to do. The arbitrator shouldhave passed a definite award in respect ofthe above said items. The fact that thearbitrator passed an interim award in respectof the above said claims is also evident fromthe last para of the award. The said parareads as follows:-'In the result, I make an interim award inthis case and direct that the respondent saidshall work-out the rates of items covered inthe claims decided above in accordance withthe findings given above and shall send acopy to the claimant side and the undersignedwithin one month. In case the claimant sideagrees to the same...
Priya Holdings Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Auto General Engineering Co.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2001
Reported in: 2002IIIAD(Delhi)848; 2002(2)RAJ367
V.S. Aggarwal. J.1. In pursuance of the arbitrator having filed the award and the proceedings notices had been issued to the parties. Objections have been preferred by the objector (Auto General Engineering co.) which are being contested. 2. The relevant facts are that on 29th September, 1983 an agreement was entered into between the parties. The objector entered into an agreement for sale with the applicant (Priya Holdings Pvt. Ltd.) for sale of the total recoveries of the ship CAPT COASTAS E. Material terms of the agreement were:-'That the material terms and conditions of the Agreement are set out hereinafter :- (i) Liability to pay customs duty was that of the objector; (ii) The objector was to give irrevocable authority to a sister concern of the petitioner, namely, M/s Hindustan Ship Breakers (hereinafter referred to as 'Hindustan'), enabling it to take deliveries of the scrap of ship breaking; (iii) The liability of payment of sales-tax and other levies and charges, if nay, on th...
Murari Lal Sharma Vs. Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-2001
Reported in: 96(2002)DLT412; 2002(63)DRJ776; [2002(93)FLR919]
Anil Dev Singh, J. 1. This is a Letter Patent Appeal directed against thejudgment and order of the learned Single Judge in CWP No.5754/98 dated May 26, 2000 whereby the award of the LabourCourt in I.D. No. 26/1992 dated March 2, 1998 was modified.Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the aforesaid appealare as follows:- The appellant joined the Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathanas Peon. He worked in that capacity till February 5, 1987.While working a Peon he applied for the post of AccountsClerk with the respondent. On April 4, 1988 he was appointedas Accounts Clerk at Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan, Agra. OnNovember 30, 1988 his services were terminated. Aggrieved bythe order of termination he sought a reference to theIndustrial Tribunal. The Central Government referred thefollowing dispute to the Industrial Tribunal :- 'Whether the Regional Coordinator, Nehru Yuva KendraSengthan, Agra, is justified in terminating theservices of Sh. Murari Lal Sharma, Accounts Clerk,w.e.f. 1.12.1988? If not, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »