Delhi Court August 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.
Gyan Singh Kalsi Vs. A.K. Mahajan and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: AIR2001Delhi480; 94(2001)DLT151; 2002(61)DRJ274
ORDERV.S. Aggarwal, J.1. Present suit has been filed by Gyan Singh Kalsi, hereinafter described as the plaintiff for recovery of RPS.5,00,000/- and for a mandatory injunction against the defendants to restore status quo ante as on 5.6.1980 and to implement the directions of the Minister of State for Finance, Government of India.2. The facts alleged and cajoled from the plaint are that plaintiff is a refugee from Nairobi, Kenya. His ancestors had arrived in 1880 and had settled in Kenya where the plaintiff had a flourishing business. He shifted to India with his family some time in 1969. The plaintiff started business at new Rohtak Road.3. A building F-41 Connaught Place, originally belonged to M/s Indian Life Assurance Company. It had granted a lease of the premises to Shriek R.K. Singh on 11.6.57. The said premises comprised of first floor flat and portion of the building on the ground floor. On 23rd February, 1967 Shri R.K. Singh entered into an agreement with Life Insurance Corporat...
Parshadi and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: 93(2001)DLT436
ORDERVijender Jain, J.1. Rule.2. Initially the petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents to decide the representations of the petitioners dated 4.11.1996. 6.12.1996 and 24.1.1997 for releasing from acquisition the lands situated in Village Kotla Maghigiran, Mehrauli either in terms of minutes recorded on 7.7.1995 as communicated on 28.7.1995 or issue fresh order and gazette it under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act. Further relief was sought directing the respondent to implement the National Hosing Policy, 1994 as adopted by both the Houses of Parliament.3. During the pendency of the writ petition, on the representation of the petitioners the then Union Minister for Urban Development vide its order dated 13.4.1999 denotified the land of the petitioners as well as prepared a draft denotification notice. That decision was reversed by the succeeding Minister on 6.7.1999. The decision of reversal is under challenge before this Court.4. It was...
Jai Bhagwan and Others Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: 93(2001)DLT824; 2001(60)DRJ272
ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J.1. By this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. petitioners 1 to 5 are seeking quashing of FIR Nos. 387/97, 565/97, 16/98, 498/98, 50/98 under Sections 406/420/120-B IPC, P.S. Desh Bandhu Gupta Road, Delhi registered against them.2. It is alleged that about 400 employees working in the DCM received compensation, on its closure in March, 1989. Petitioner No. 1 Jai Bhagwan Singh, representing himself as an agent induced the employees to deposit amounts in the funds of the DCM with he promise that each depositor shall receive payment at fixed intervals along with interest. On the basis of these inducements workers deposited their hard earned money. It is alleged that in August 1996 petitioners floated six finance companies and diverted deposits of the investors in the said companies without their knowledge or consent cheques issued to the depositors were dishonoured. On the complaint lodged by the depositors, several criminal cases were registered against the petitioner...
Sd. Paramjit Singh Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: 93(2001)DLT740
ORDERManmohan Sarin, J. 1. With consent of the parties, the writ petition is taken up for disposal.2. Petitioner, Sd. Paramjit Singh, has filed this writ petition seeking direction for respondent Nos.1 to 3 for removal of illegal cluster and constructions or obstruction existing on the 30 ft. wide road adjoining Army Press in Khyber Pass, Civil Lines, Delhi. Petitioner claims to be the owner of the said Army Press. In this writ petition, I am not concerned with the issue of ownership of the said Press and nothing stated herein would amount to any expression of opinion on that aspect.3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent/MCD. Respondent No.4 has also filed his counter affidavit, wherein it is claimed that petitioner has made false allegations. it is claimed that the petitioner is seeking to somehow get legal sanctity for his claim to the title to the Army Press. As noticed earlier, I am not concerned with the issue of title in the writ petition.4. MCD has filed two affid...
Shri Ram Karan Goel Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: 95(2002)DLT421; 2001(60)DRJ715
ORDERVijender Jain, J. 1. It is a petition under Sections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act to make the Award a Rule of the Court. Arbitrator was appointed in Suit No.2545/93 by this Court on 15.2.1994 in view of dispute and differences between the parties in terms of arbitration Clause. As there is a dispute with regard to order of reference, I reproduce the same as under :- S.No. 2545/93 & is 9762/93. 2. This is a petition filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and in this petition it has been prayed that the dispute mentioned in para 11 of the petition be referred to arbitration in terms of the Arbitration Clause. The existence of the arbitration clause being Clause 25 is admitted by the parties. Accordingly, I direct the defendant/ respondent to refer the disputes mentioned in para 11 of the petitioner to arbitration in terms of Arbitration Clause 25 within eight weeks from today. I further direct that the defendant will not take any action ...
M/S Redington (India) Ltd. Vs. Modi Olivetti Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: 94(2001)DLT205
ORDERV.S. Aggarwal, J. 1. M/s Redington (India) Ltd. has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs. 28,04,626.50. The suit has been filed against M/s Modi Olivetti Ltd.2. It has been pleaded that the plaintiff was earlier known as Redington (India) Pvt. Ltd. and after 23rd April, 1998 was re-named as Redington (India) Ltd. The plaintiff carriers on the business of selling/marketing of computers and computer peripherals and allied products of various reputed companies. The defendant has been purchasing various goods/items from the plaintiff till March 1998. The defendant purchased goods being computer printers of Epson make and DFX 800 model against orders dated 7.5.1996, 21.5.1996 and 8.6.1996. As per payment terms, both the invoices were by means of negotiations of inland letters of credit. The defendant sent copies of letter of credit in favor of the plaintiff.3. As desired by the defendant the goods were delivered at the defendant's branch at Secunderabad. The plaintiff was supposed...
Kali Charan Vs. Ishwar Dass
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: 93(2001)DLT304; 2002(61)DRJ401
Devinder Gupta. J.1. The defendant/appellant has filed this appeal challenging the order passed on 21.8.2000 by learned Single Judge dismissing his application (IA.2723/2000) filed under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. seeking amendment to the written statement.2. The plaintiff/respondent filed a suit claiming decree for partition with respect to property bearing No.5562-5664, Laddo Ghati, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi and property bearing No.3596-3597, Dariba Pan, Paharganj, New Delhi. Plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 are the sons of late Bagwan Dass. The plaintiff alleged that after the death of their parents, the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 got mutated in their joint names immovable properties and thus the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 became joint owners having 1/3rd share each. The plaintiff further alleged that in a portion of property No.5362 to 5364 the plaintiff along with his family and defendants 1 and 2 along with their respective families have been residing but rent was being recei...
Mohinder Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: 2001VIIAD(Delhi)468; 2002(1)Crimes1; 93(2001)DLT589
R.S. Sodhi, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.11.1995 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge is Sessions Case No. 141/95 whereby the leaned Additional Sessions Judge held the appellant guilty under Section 25/54/59 of the Arms Act and further by his separate order of the same date sentenced him to undergo R.I. for four years with a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for fifteen days. The appellant was further sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years.2. The facts of the case as noted by the leaned Additional sessions Judge are as follows:'On 11.2.86, at about 8.30 p.m. all the above mentioned accused persons in furtherance of their common intention entered the shop of Balu Ram Goel was handing over some money to Hari at that the above said accused persons who were armed with pistols entered the shop of Balu Ram Goel and one of the accused person put pistol on the chest of Balu Ram Goel and the other ...
Kwality Restaurant and Ice Cream Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: [2002]253ITR689(Delhi)
1. These three reference applications relate to the same assessed-KwalityRestaurant and Ice Cream for the assessment years 1964-65, 1967-68 and 1966-67. Pursuant to the direction given by this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), the following questions have been referred for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and on a true construction of the agreement dated April 30, 1962, the Tribunal was right in law in disallowing the claim of the assessed for the expenditure of Rs. 12,800 incurred in respect of the business of Maharaja Restaurant in West Germany as a business loss ? 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and on a true construction of the agreement dated April 30, 1962, the Tribunal was right in law in disallowing the claim of the assessed for the expenditure of Rs. 16,766 incurred in the course of the business of the assessed ? 3. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the ...
Cit Vs. Kwality Restaurant and Ice-cream
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-2001
Reported in: [2001]119TAXMAN718(Delhi)
At the instance of the revenue, the following questions have been referred for opinion of this court under section 256(1) of the Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the Tribunal, Delhi Bench :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessment in question stood merged with the first appellate order and, hence, it was no longer open to the Commissioner, Central II, after 28-10-1978 to exercise revisional jurisdiction ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that assessed's liability to pay sales tax had not within the meaning of section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, closed on 27-3-1974, the date of Delhi High Court's decision, but would cease in the later previous year, namely, on the date when Supreme Court decides the Delhi Administration's appeal; against the Delhi High Court's decision?'2. Dispute relates to the assessment year ...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »