Delhi Court May 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.
Shri Akesh Kumar JaIn and anr. Vs. Shri Harmeet Singh Bakshi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-2001
Reported in: 2001(59)DRJ734
ORDERSanjay Kishan Kaul, J. CM No.1259/2000 ---------------1. The application has been filed by the appellants under order 41 rule 27 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 for filing an additional document on record for purposes of hearing the present appeal. The document in question is the will dated 6.4.93 alleged to have been executed by Late Shri Bakshi Shamsher Singh in favor of Mr. S.S.Sahni in respect of the first floor of property bearing No.D-1059, New Friends Colony, New Delhi. It has been stated in the application that since the appellants were not parties to the present document, they could not obtain copy of the same on an earlier date. It has been further averred that the document in question is of an unimpeachable nature and the same may be considered for purposes of hearing the present appeal.2. In view of the averments made in the application, we are of the view that no harm or prejudice is likely to be caused to the other party in case the applicat...
Sunil Shakti Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-2001
Reported in: 2001IVAD(Delhi)982; 92(2001)DLT772; 2001(59)DRJ151
ORDERS.K. Agarwal. J.1. This is a petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.100/97 under section 409 read with section 120B Indian Penal Code, PS Greater Kailash-I and consequential proceedings thereon pending in the court of Sh.K S Mohi, Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi.2. ADMIT. Learned counsel for hte petitioner submits that the point involved in the revision petition is very short and the same be heard and disposed of at this stage itself.3. Prosecution allegations in brief are : that petitioner ws the Managing Director of M/s Fintra Systems Limited, a non-banking finance company engaged in para banking and related financial activities. The petitioner, through advertisements, invited deposits from public assuring lucrative returns; carried away by the representations hundreds of investors made deposit. The petitioner issued cheques towards payment of interest and/or return of principal amounts. These cheques were dishonoured. On the basis of a complaint filed by o...
Sunil Shakt Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-2001
Reported in: 94(2001)DLT495
ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J.1. This is an application under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.) for grant of bail in case FIR No. 100/97 PS Greater Kailash-I under section 409 read with section 120B IPC.2. Prosecution allegations in brief are : that petitioner was the Managing Director of M/s. Fintra Systems Limited, a non-banking finance company engaged in para-banking and related financial activities. The petitioner's through advertisements, invited deposits form public assuring lucrative returns; carried away by representations hundreds of investors deposits money. The petitioner issued cheques towards payment of interest and/or return of principal amounts. These cheques were dishonoured. On the basis of a complaint filed by one of the investors alleging embezzlement, misappropriation and siphoning off the funds, above noted case was registered. During investigations it was found that petitioner in pursuance of a criminal conspiracy received public funds, misap...
Tanuja Arora Vs. Lt. Governor and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-2001
Reported in: 95(2002)DLT733; 2001(59)DRJ433; 2002(80)ECC438
ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J.1. The petitioner, wife of the detenu Ram Murti has challenged the order of detention No. F5/12/2000/HP-II dated 20.6.2000 passed by Lt. Governor of National Capital Territory of Delhi u/s.3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter the Act).2. The ground of detention, inter ali, stated: that on 9th April, 2000 the detenu arrived at the I.G.I. Airport, New Delhi, from Dubai by Gulf Airlines flight GF 130. After immigration clearance he allegedly walked through the green channel and was stopped by the Customs Preventive Officer at the exit gate of Arrival Hall and was asked whether he was carrying any dutiable goods. He replied in the negative. Two independent witnesses were called and in their presence he was again asked whether he was carrying and dutiable goods such as gold, silver, mobile phones, etc. This time again detenu replied in the negative. Thereupon, a notice u/s. 102 of the Customs Act, 196...
Jaya Food Industries P.Ltd. Vs. Spectrum Technologies Usa Inc. and Oth ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-2001
Reported in: 2001(60)DRJ668
ORDERDevinder Gupta, J. 1. These three appeals have been preferred by defendants 1, 2 and 4 against the order passed by learned Single Judge on the application (IA. No. 5034/2001) filed by respondent NO. 3 in suit NO. 765/2001 thereby allowing the said application and clarifying the earlier order dated 19.4.2001.2. Spectrum Power Generation Company Limited (for short 'S.P.G.L.') is defendant No.1; Jaya Food Industries Pvt. Ltd. (for short 'JFI') is defendant NO.2; National Thermal Power Corporation (for short 'NTPC') is defendant NO.3 and Mr. M. Kishan Rao is defendant NO.4 in the suit filed by Spectrum Technologies, USA INC (for short 'STUSA').3. The cause for filing suit arose because of an agreement entered into between NTPC on one hand and SPGL, JFI and M. Kishan Rao on the other hand, which was filed before the Supreme Court in S.L.P.(C) No.14864/2000. The said S.L.P. had been filed by NTPC against the order of a Division Bench of this Court dated 7.7.2000 dismissing its appeal an...
Vishnu Vs. State (N.C.T. of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ4006
ORDERMahmood Ali Khan, J. 1. These four appeals filed by Mahinder, Vishnu, Daulat Ram @ Kalia and Salim @ Langra under Section 374 of the Cr.P.C. are directed against an order of Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi dated 15.4.1996/18.4.1996 whereby he has convicted the four appellants for commission of offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and has sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and further sentenced appellants Mahinder and Vishnu to pay fine of Rs.8,000/- each and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for period of three years each and sentenced appellants Daulat Ram @ Kalia and Salim @ Langra to pay a fine of Rs.4,000/- each and in default of payment to undergo rigourous imprisonment for two years each. He further convicted appellant Vishnu for committing offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act and has sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2500/- in default whereof to further...
Smt. Duru Manchandani Vs. Shri K.R. Manjani
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-2001
Reported in: 94(2001)DLT280; 2001(59)DRJ730
ORDERVikramajit Sen, J.1. A petition was filed by the landlord/Respondent under Section 14(1)(g)of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the DRC Act') which has concurrently found favor with both the Courts below. The Additional Rent Controller (hereinafter referred to as 'the ARC') came to the conclusion that the premises were required bonafide for purposes of building/reconstruction, and that this activity could not be completed without the eviction of the tenant/Petitioner. The decision of this Court reported as Kailash Kumar vs. R.S. Raizada, 1972 RCR 433, was relied upon for the proposition that the interests of the tenant need not be considered under sub-section (g); and on Prem Chand alias Prem Nath vs . Smt. Shanta Prabhakar, : AIR1997SC4367 , that the condition of the property need not be gone into where eviction is prayed for on the grounds of reconstruction. The ARC was satisfied that the Landlord was possessed of sufficient funds and that building plans ha...
M/S. Aadhar Stumbh Vs. N.D.M.C.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-2001
Reported in: 94(2001)DLT248
ORDERA.K. Sikri, J.1. Decree Holder has filed this Execution Petition under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure. Execution is sought of award dated 5th November, 1999 passed by Shri S.B. Jhamba, Arbitrator, Chief Engineer, CPWD. As per this award learned Arbitrator awarded the following amounts against respective claims to the Decree Holder:---------------------------------------------- CLAIM AMOUNT AWARDED---------------------------------------------1. Claim no.1(a) Rs. 19,150/-2. Claim no.1(b) Rs. 4,817/-3. Claim no.1(c) Rs. 21,810/-4. Claim no.1(d) Rs. 2,505/-5. Claim no.1(e) Rs. 2,25,105/-6. Claim no.1(f) Rs. 12,000/-7. Claim no.2 Rs.8. Claim no.3 Rs. 5,000/-9. Claim no.5(a) Rs. 71,584.7010. Claim no.6 Rs. 4,000/-11. Claim no.5(b) Rs. 39,814.63-------------------------------------------- Total : RS. 4,05,796.33p--------------------------------------------2. The Judgment Debtor had preferred counte...
Dy. Cit Vs. Kanjimal and Sons
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-2001
Reported in: (2001)74TTJ(Del)328
ORDERSmt. Diva Singh, J.M.This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order dated 28-7-1994, of Commissioner (Appeals)-V, New Delhi . It pertains to the assessment year 1986-87.2. The revenue has raised the following ground before us :'On the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in law in deleting the penalty under section 273(2)(a) by relying on the order of her predecessor for the assessment year 1980-81 who cancelled the penalty levied under section 273(2)(a) on the basis of Delhi High Court order that penalty under section 273 cannot be initiated in the case of reassessment whereas in the present case, the penalty under section 273 has been initiated during the course of a regular assessment.'3. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that relief in the present appeal had been granted by the Commissioner (Appeals) relying upon the order for the assessment year 1980-81, wherein the decision of the Supreme Court had been relie...
J.K. International Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-25-2001
Reported in: 2002IVAD(Delhi)211; 2002CriLJ2601; 96(2002)DLT795; 2002(62)DRJ170
S.K. Agarwal, J. 1. Admit. This petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, Cr.P.C.) is directed against the order dated 12th March, 1999 passed by the court of Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi dismissing in default the complaint of the petitioner No. 141/96 titled 'J K International v. SKG Solvex Ltd. and Ors. (hereinafter, the complainant).2. Brief facts are: that the petitioner field two complaints against M/s. SKG Solvex Limited and others, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1882 on the same dated. In the above complaint it was alleged that cheque for Rs. 4 lacs dated 30th July, 1996 drawn on State Bank of Indore, Bombay, issued in favor of the petitioner was returned unpaid for the reason 'payment stopped by the drawer'. The Magistrate started enquiry to find out whether there is sufficient ground to proceed. These complaints were listed together for hearing on 20th September, 1996, 5th December, 1996, 13th February, 1997, 3rd April, 1997, 8th...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »