Delhi Court November 2002 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 Sharad Vats Vs. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2002
Reported in: 102(2003)DLT559; 2003(66)DRJ712
Manmohan Sarin, J. 1. Petitioner Mr. Sharad Vats by this writ petition seeks quashing of impugned notice dated21.5.1998, Annexure P.1 to the writ petition. Petitioner further seeks a direction restraining the respondents from disconnecting his telephone bearing No. 5543391 installed at Flat WZ-338, Lajwanti Garden, New Delhi. By the impugned notice petitioner was called upon to clear the outstanding dues amounting to Rs. 150254/- (one lac fifty thousand two hundred and fifty four only) in respect of telephone No. 5599211 in the name of petitioner's father Ltd. Col. S.M. Sharma.2. The facts in so far as they are relevant for the disposal of the writ petition may be briefly noted:-Petitioner's father Lt. Col. S.M. Sharma was the subscriber to telephone No. 5599211, installed at the same flat that is WZ-338, Lajwanti Garden, New Delhi. Ltd. Col. S.M. Sharma had complained about defects in the STD locking system in February, 1992, September 1992, November 1992 and on 4.4.1993. It is the ca...
Sanjay Khanna Vs. Discovery Communications India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2002
Reported in: 101(2002)DLT281
Vikramajit Sen, J.1. Mr. Ashok Desai, learned Senior counsel has appeared for the Respondent company pursuant to a Caveat filed on its behalf. it is his contention that the present case in not a fit one for the issuance of even a Notice.2. Mr. Badar Ahmad, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, has relied on a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in The National Conduits (P) Ltd. v. S.S. Arora, : [1968]1SCR430 , and to the following passage in particular.'When a petition is filed before the High Court for winding up of a company under the order of the Court, the High Court (i) may issue notice to the Company to show cause why the petition should not be admitted; (ii) may admit the petition and fix a date for hearing and issue a notice to the Company before giving directions about advertisement of the petition; or (iii) may admit the petition, fix the date of hearing of the petition, and order that the petition be advertised and direct that the petition be served upon persons sp...
Rajdhani Flour Mills Ltd. Vs. Uttam Agro Foods (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2002
Reported in: 2003(66)DRJ111
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. This order will dispose of defendant's application under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC') for stay of the suit on the ground that the matter in issue is directly and substantially in issue in the previously instituted suit between the same parties. For the sake of convenience, parties are here-in-after referred to as 'plaintiff' & 'defendant'.2. Facts necessary for the disposal of this application are that on 31st July, 2001 plaintiff instituted a suit for recovery of Rs. 31,77,976.71 pleading therein that in October, 2000 on the basis of sample shown by the representative of defendant company plaintiff orally placed an order for supply of 450 MTs of grams with the defendant through its representative. The payment of the goods to be supplied by the defendant company was agreed to be made after ten days from the date of delivery/loading as per practice prevailing in the market of Mumbai. In third week of October, 2000, the plaintiff pl...
S. Raminder Singh Vs. Nct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2002
Reported in: 102(2003)DLT511; 2003(66)DRJ329
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (for short the 'Act') against the National Capital Territory of Delhi (for short 'NCT of Delhi') and Engineer-in-Chief, PWD (for short 'PWD'), praying for an ad-interim order restraining the respondent PWD, its agents, etc. including the National Highway Authority of India (for short 'NHAI'), from taking down or defacing the advertisements boards or allowing any third party, including the National Highway Authority of India, to display their boards on the NH-II Road stretch from Ashram Crossing to Apollo Hospital (for short 'the road in question').2. Petitioner claims itself to be a voluntary agency, planting and maintaining trees and shrubs in and around stretches of roads, round-abouts and areas belonging to and owned by the government/local authorities. Petitioner entered into separate agreements/memorandums of understanding for different stretches of roads in Delhi, numberi...
Melco India (P.) Ltd. and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2002
Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Del)242; [2003]260ITR450(Delhi)
D.K. Jain, J.1. Rule D.B.2. Since a very short point of law is involved, and there is no controversy on facts, we proceed to dispose of the writ petition at this stage itself.3. A common order, dated October 4, 2002, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-II, New Delhi, in exercise of powers under Section 127 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the 'Act'), transferring the cases of the four petitioners from New Delhi to Central Circle, Faridabad, is under challenge in this writ petition.4. The main ground of challenge is that before passing the impugned order, the petitioners were not granted any opportunity of being heard in the matter of transfer of their jurisdiction from Delhi, where they are being assessed for the last several years.5. On the last date of hearing, we had asked Mr. R.C. Pandey, learned senior standing counsel for the Revenue, who had put in appearance on advance notice, to seek instructions as to whether an opportunity to put forth their view point on t...
The Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Vs. Jawahar Mal and Sons and o ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2002
Reported in: II(2003)BC135
S.K. Agarwal, J. 1. This order will dispose of application of the defendants under Order 39 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, seeking direction to the plaintiff for payment of Rs. 24,62,935.40 or in the alternative, to allow the defendants to encash the Bank Guarantee furnished by the plaintiff, pursuant to the order dated 11.9.1997. The plaintiff has filed the reply contesting the same. 2. Facts in brief are : that plaintiff filed a suit pleading that it is engaged in the business of marketing, milk products including, butter, cheese, milk powder, etc. under the popular brand names of 'Amul' and 'Sagar' having its registered office at Gujarat and regional office at Delhi. The products of the plaintiff are essential commodities under the Essential Commodities Act. The defendants are engaged in the business of running cold storage under the name of M/s. Jawahar Mal Cold Storage. Plaintiff used to store its products at the cold storage of M/s. Fruit & Vegetables a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Orissa Cement Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2002
Reported in: (2003)179CTR(Del)354; [2003]260ITR626(Delhi)
D.K. Jain, J.1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), is directed against the order dated January 22, 2002, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal') in I. T. A. No. 513/Delhi of 1993, pertaining to the assessment year 1987-88.2. Briefly stated the background facts, giving rise to the present appeal, are :The assessed, a public limited company, is engaged in the business of manufacturing cement refractories and allied products at Rajgangpur, Orissa. During the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1987-88, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessed had claimed a sum of Rs. 62,09,542 as commission paid to Ceramic Sales, its sole selling agents for sale of refractories. The said agents were also responsible for realisation of the sale proceeds. He also noticed that the assessed had also claimed as revenue expenditure Rs. 78,22,545, paid by it as interest to various financial in...
Association of Ups and Power Conditioning Systems Manufacturer Vs. Ori ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-01-2002
Reported in: II(2004)BC446; 107(2003)DLT680
ORDER1. We have Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the petition. The petitioner is placing reliance upon the decision of Division Bench in CW 3665/2002 in Association of UPS and Power Conditioning Systems Manufacturer v. Society of Applied Microwave Electronics Engineering and Research (Sameer) and Ors., decided on 13th August, 2002 in order to challenge one of the eligibility conditions stipulated in the public notice issued by the respondent for empanelment of vendors for supply, installation and maintenance of uninterrupted power supply systems. In the impugned notice, condition is that the turnover of the bidder from UPS business should not be less than Rs. 15 crores in India during the last financial year and that it should be a profitable company. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that such a criteria is vocative of the petitioner's fundamental rights to bid and participate in tender and such a criteria was held to be unreasonable in view of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›