Delhi Court September 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.
M/S Rajendra and Company Vs. Sh. G.S. Jugti and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: 2001(60)DRJ482
ORDERVijender Jain, J. 1. Aggrieved by the Award of the Arbitrator, the respondent has filed objections. This case has got a chequered history. Certain disputes arose a petition was filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Arbitration Act, 1947 before the Additional District Judge. The Additional District Judge framed the following issues:- 1) Whether the petition has been signed and verified by a competent person and the petition instituted legally? OPP 2. Whether the petition is maintainable? OPP 3). Whether the petition is within the period of Limitation? OPP 4). Whether the petitioner is entitled to any relief? OPP 5). Whether the Arbitration Clause applies to the facts of this case and invoked lawfully? OPP 6). Whether the contract came to an end on 14.9.1986? OPP 7). Relief. 2. However, the Court held that the Contract has already expired and petition was time barred and the same was thereforee dismissed. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed a petition being CM...
Hemant Suryanath Dubey Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: 94(2001)DLT878; 2001(60)DRJ467
ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J. 1. This is a petition u/s. 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in the case FIR No. 878/2000 dated 8.12.2000, u/Ss. 255/256/258/259/260/120B IPC, P.S. Crime Cell, South District, Nehru Place, Kalkaji (hereinafter 'case in Delhi').2. Prosecution allegations in brief are: on 8th December, 2000 one Prahlad Singh was caught red-handed while supplying counterfeit Government Stamps of foreign bills worth Rs. 1,00,000/- (rupees one lac) to Ranbaxy Lab Limited. During the investigations fake stamps of Rs. 18,48,300/- were seized at his instance. He was arrested in the above-noted case. In the disclosure statement, he stated that he has been working for one Narinder Singh proprietor of M/s. +Blue Star Services and that the fake stamps were being supplied by Hemant Suryanath Dubey of Mumbai (petitioner). Narender Singh was also arrested. On interrogation he stated that he is the proprietor of M/s. Blue Star Services, which deals in the supply of Stamps pertaining to s...
Mrs. Manju Pal Vs. Govt. of National Capital Territory of Delhi and an ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: 2002(61)DRJ58
ORDERAnil Dev Singh, J. 1. Admit. 2. Since the question involved in the appeal is a short one we proceed to dispose of the same. 3. By this appeal the appellant challenges the impugned order dated 4th October, 1999 passed by the learned Single Judge in CW No. 6025/1999. Brief facts giving rise to the appeal are as follows:- 4. The appellant is a graduate with Hindi as one of the subjects. Pursuant to an advertisement issued by the Delhi Subordinate Service Section Board she applied for the post of a Primary Assistant Teacher in the MCD under the OBC Category. In the selection process the appellant secured 43.88 marks whereas the cut-off score was 43.33 marks. Despite the fact that the appellant secured more marks than persons who were selected under the OBC Category, she did not find her name in the list of selected candidates. The appellant is stated to have met the Secretary of the Selection. Board and submitted a representation. The appellant was informed that since she had not stud...
M/S Goyal Mg Gases Ltd. and ors. Vs. M/S Punjab Wireless Systems Ltd. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: AIR2002Delhi159
ORDERK.S. Gupta, J.1. This order will govern the disposal of is No. 3156/2001 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 read with Section 151 CPC by the plaintiffs.2. Suit was instituted alleging that defendant No. 1-company is holding 51% equity shares in defendant No. 4-company while remaining 49% shares are held by defendant No. 2-company. Under a Inter Corporate Deposit Agreement dated 29th April, 1998, the plaintiff No. 1-company deposited with defendant No. 1 and amount of Rs. 1 crore which was repayable with interest on 27th August, 1998. Defendant No. 1 being unable to repay this amount with interest vide letter dated 1st February, 1999 requested plaintiff No. 1 to roll-over ICD for an additional period of 134 days. Plaintiff No. 1 agreed to roll-over the ICD for said period and a fresh Inter Corporate Deposit Agreement dated 1st February, 1999 was entered into between the parties. In order to secure plaintiff No. 1 for re-payment of said amount with interest, the defendant NO. 1 ple...
Gurbachan Singh Bhawnani Vs. the State and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: 2002(61)DRJ63
ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J. 1. These petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') have raised a common question of law as to, whether the offences under Sections 39/44 of the India Electricity Act (for short 'I.E.Act') read with Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), which are non-compoundable, can be permitted to be compounded, by quashing the FIRs., consequent upon payment made by accused persons of the theft bill amount, after theft was detected and prosecution launched? 2. For the purposes of appreciating the controversy, facts of all the cases need not be stated. One case (Crl.M.(M).4107/2000) is being treated as the lead case. The facts of this case, in brief, are as under: 3. On 21st March, 1997, Assistant Engineer, DVB lodge a report (FIR), alleging that on 17.3.1997, as per directions of the Superintendent Engineer (Enforcement), joint team consisting of officials from e...
Sushil Ansal Vs. State Through Cbi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1369; 95(2002)DLT623; 2002(63)DRJ585
R.C. Chopra, J. 1. Morning of June 13, 1997 was as bright as ever but the evening turned out to be the darkest for those whose kith and kin had gone to the matinee show at Uphaar Cinema. A fire in a transformer emitted thick smoke and toxic gases, which asphyxiated 59 patrons to death besides injuring over 100 in the balcony of the cinema. The agony, grief and the sorrow of those who lost their nears and dears in this tragedy can never be adequately compensated but the law enforcement agencies and justice delivery system come under a heavy duty to find out the cause of the incident, persons responsible for the cause and then proceed against them all in accordance with law.2. In Crl. R. 238/2001 filed on behalf of petitioner Sh. Sushil Ansal former Managing Director of Green Park M/s. Theatres Associated Private Limited, which had built and established Uphaar Cinema, the prayer is to discharge him of the charges framed against him by the trial Court under Sections 304-A, 337, 338 read w...
Bharat General Reinsurance Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: (2001)170CTR(Del)629; [2002]256ITR587(Delhi)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J. 1. Accepting the prayer of the assessed for reference in terms of Section 18 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 (in short 'the Act'), read with Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the I. T. Act'), the following question has been referred for the opinion of this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench (in short 'the Tribunal') :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the reserve on account of retrocession's ceded by the company could form a part of capital and/or reserve of the assessed-company under the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 ?'2. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1971-72.3. The factual position in a nutshell is as follows :The assessed (hereinafter referred to in short as 'BG') at the relevant point of time was engaged in the business of general reinsurance of fire, marine, motor and miscellaneous policies. Reinsurance is made by ceding a part of thepremiu...
Dy. Cit Vs. R.J. Wood and Co. (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: (2002)76TTJ(Del)387
ORDERPhool Singh, J.M.This appeal, preferred by the revenue, is directed against Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) is order dated 30-10-1995, relating to the assessment year 1984-85 by which penalty of Rs. 7,87,815 imposed by the assessing officer under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, was deleted.2. Relevant facts as noted by the assessing officer are that assessed filed return for assessment year 1984-85 showing value of building at 12/4, Milestone, Mathura Road, Faridabad at Rs. 8,52,321 and assessment was completed on 29-8-1985, in which value of the Faridabad property was assessed at Rs. 24 lakhs. The assessment order was set aside by the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) vide order, dated 23-12-1986, and in subsequent proceedings the assessing officer valued the property of Faridabad at Rs. 75,89,000. The Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) reduced the valuation thereof to Rs. 64,49,874. While framing the fresh assessment order the assessing officer also initi...
Goyal Mg Gases Ltd. and ors. Vs. Punjab Wireless Systems Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: 94(2001)DLT697
ORDER1. This order will govern the disposal of is No. 3156/2001 filed under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151, CPC by the plaintiffs.2. Suit was instituted alleging that defendant No. 1-Company is holding 51% equity shares in defendant No. 4-company while remaining 49% shares are held by defendant No. 2-company. Under a Inter Corporate Deposit Agreement dated 29th April, 1998, the plaintiff No. 1-company deposited with defendant No. 1 an amount of Rs. 1 crore which was repayable with interest on 27th August, 1998. Defendant No. 1 being unable to repay this amount with interest vide letter dated 1st February. 1999 requested plaintiff No. 1 to roll-over ICD for an additional period of 134 days. Plaintiff No. 1 agreed to roll-over the ICD for said period and a fresh Inter Corporate Deposit Agreement dated 1st February, 1999 was entered into between the parties. In order to secure plaintiff No. 1 for re-payment of said amount with interest, the defendant No. 1 pledged a tota...
Cit Vs. Escorts Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-11-2001
Reported in: [2002]121TAXMAN37(Delhi)
Arijit Pasayat, C.J.These four applications involve common questions which have been referred for opinion of this court by the Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'E, under section 18(1) of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 read with section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The questions read as under :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the deduction allowed under Chapter VI-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is to be proportionately reduced from the computation of capital for surtax purposes in terms of rule 4 of the Second Schedule to the Surtax Act, 1964 ?'2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessed is entitled to deduction at 50 per cent of the total donation made by the assessed which fell within the ambit of section 80G(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the purpose of rule 1(vii) of the First Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 ?'Dispute relates to the assessment years 1976-77 to 1979-80.2. We have heard the le...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »