Delhi Court April 2002 Judgments

Sarjeet Singh Vs. Commissioner of Police and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2002IIIAD(Delhi)1073; 2002CriLJ3824; 97(2002)DLT851; 2002(62)DRJ644

V.S. Aggarwal, J. 1. Sarjeet Singh, petitioner by virtue of the present petition seeks quashing of the history sheet opened with respect to the petitioner and for a direction to the respondent to destroy the history sheet and from restraining the respondent from taking finger prints, photograph etc. which have to be kept in the police record. 2. The facts which prompt the petitioner to file the present petition are that there were certain cases registered against the petitioner at Police Station Trilok Puri, Shakarpur, Lodhi Colony, Mayur Vihar etc. He has never been convicted by the court and some cases out of the cases that have been registered are pending. According to the petitioner he has been implicated falsely in those cases because of certain rivalry and that as a result of those cases that are pending the petitioner's name has been entered in the register of history sheets that is being maintained. It is on these broad facts that it is claimed that the said order referred to a...

Pragya Chopra and anr. Vs. Ranjit Singh and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2003ACJ1177; 2002IVAD(Delhi)302; 97(2002)DLT513; 2002(62)DRJ749

R.C. Chopra, J. 1. The appellants are the parents of the deceased who at the time of his death in the accident in question on 9.12.1984 was aged about 30 years. The appellants claimed a sum of Rs. 8 lakhs as compensation alleging that the deceased was their only son and was earning about Rs. 2000 per month. Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 48000/- to the appellants with interest @ 12 per cent per annum holding that the income of the deceased was about Rs. 1200/- per month out of which the financial assistance to the appellants could be Rs. 400/- per month only. A multiplier of 10 was adopted to assess the compensation payable to the appellants. 2. None appeared for the parties. I have gone through the records of the case. 3. At the out set it may be stated that the Insurer-respondent No. 3 had raised a plea of limited liability and pleaded that its liability was limited to the extent of Rs. 50,000/- only. The learned MACT decided the issue, against the Insure...

Smt. Sukarma Kher and ors. Vs. N.K. NagIn Chander and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: II(2002)ACC77; 2003ACJ1926; 2002IVAD(Delhi)337; 97(2002)DLT559; 2002(62)DRJ527

R.C. Chopra, J. 1. The appellants challenge the computation as well as quantum of compensation awarded to them by learned MACT in Case No. 32/86 decided on 31.1.1990. The appellants are the parents of deceased, who was aged about 31 years at the time of his death in a road accident. The deceased was a practicing Advocate. 2. The appellants filed a petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 claiming compensation of Rupees five lakhs with interest. According to them the income of the deceased was about Rs. 3000/- per month at the time of his death and was increasing regularly. The respondent No. 1 was alleged to be the driver and respondents No. 2 and 3 the owners of the offending vehicle. 3. The present appeal is confined to the prayer for enhancement of compensation. The findings given by the learned Tribunal in regard to the fatal injuries sustained by the deceased on account of rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 1 and the claim of the appellants they were ...

Pramod Kumar Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2002IVAD(Delhi)1; 97(2002)DLT818

V.S. Aggarwal, J. 1. Appellant Pramod Kumar seeks suspension of the sentence awarded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi during the pendency of the appeal. The appellant has been held guilty of an offence punishable under Section 302/34 Indian Panel Code and has been awarded a sentence to undergo rigourous imprisonment for life besides payment of fine.2. The facts of the prosecution case asserted are that on 19th December,1999 at about 7.30 PM a dead body of one Arjun Sharma aged 13 years was recovered from the toilet of Government Boys Senior Secondary School, Geetanjali Park, West Sagarpur, New Delhi. The information was provided by one Vishnu. There were more than 10 injuries mostly lacerated wounds caused by hard and blunt object. The cause of death was injuries sustained on the skull. On 22nd December, 1999 the police had apprehended one Jitender with the help of some secret informer who during custody confessed certain facts which are not relevant. He made a disclosur...

PenguIn Books Limited Vs. Book Sales Company and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2002VIAD(Delhi)19; 98(2002)DLT611; 2002(64)DRJ279

D.K. Jain, J. 1. By this application under Order 37 Order 3(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure Code (for short 'CPC'), the defendants seeks unconditional leave to defend the suit instituted by the plaintiff for recovery of the price of goods sold, together with interest. In the application it is, inter alia, claimed that no amount is due to the plaintiff from the defendants; the suit as framed does not fall within the ambit of Order 37 CPC and the defendants have substantial defense to put forth.2. As per the plaint the suit is for recovery of fixed liquidated demand in money payable by the defendants to the plaintiff with interest arising on anenactment i.e. on four invoices raised against the defendants for the supply of books. According to the plaintiff, on defendant No. 2's assurance that thepayment would be made within 180 days of the date of supply, books were sold to the defendants. However, on demand, the defendants refused to liquidate their liability towards the plaintiff and,...

Smt. Vibha Mehta and anr. Vs. Society for the National Institute of Ph ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR2003Delhi5; 98(2002)DLT677

Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. The present suit is filed by the plaintiffs against the defendant for recovery of an amount of Rs. 5,70,000 along with pendente lite and future interest and costs.2. It is the case of the plaintiffs in the plaint that defendant herein organized a lottery with the name and title of National Sports Raffle. During the course of the same, the defendant issued tickets for general public for its draw which was to be held on 25.7.1984 for the denomination of Rs. 1/-. The defendant declared 20 first prizes of Rs. 5,00,000/- each, 100 second prizes of Rs. 50,000/- each, 100 third prizes of Rs. 10,000/- each and 3,15,000 other prizes. The plaintiffs purchased a ticket of the said lottery bearing No. A-0042583. The draw, which was to be held on 25.7.1984 was postponed and was actually held on 29.9.1984. The ticket No. A-0042583 purchased by the plaintiffs was declared to have won one of the cash prizes of Rs. 5,00,000/-. The plaintiffs, in due course, claimed the prize mon...

Virendra Sethi Vs. Kundas Das and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2002(25)PTC50(Del)

R.C. Jain, J. CM No. 10/02 1. Notice. 2. Mr. S.K. Aggarwal, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. The application stands disposed of accordingly.CM (M) No. 30/02 & CM No. 63/02 3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 4. This petition is directed against the order of the Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks dated 25th October, 2001, by which an interlocutory application dated 17th July, 2001 seeking amendment of opposition in Form TM16 has been rejected. 5. The petitioner herein has filed an opposition to the registration of a trade mark 'CHAAPAT' applied for by the respondent herein on the premises that the same is identical to the trade mark 'CHATAPAT' of the petitioner. However, subsequent to the tiling of the said opposition, the petitioner discovered that the publication of the advertisement and trade mark 'CHAAPAT' in the Journal was not proper as besides the work 'CHAAPAT' there was some other word 'PRIKAS' which was not clearly visible in the advertisement s...

Givo Limited Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., New Delhi

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2002)(141)ELT640TriDel

Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi v. Parasrampuria Synthetics Ltd. 2001 (133) E.L.T. 9 (S.C.) we answer the question referred holding that goods in question are classified under Heading 49.06 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and liable to duty under Heading 98.03.2. The case is referred to the Original Bench for hearing on all other issues....

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mahendra Gupta and Golden

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. These two appeals of the Revenue arise out of a common order passed by CIT(A), since involve same question of law and fact are being taken up together and are being disposed of by a common order.One of the grounds of challenge in both these appeals is to the order of the CIT(A) in directing the AO to treat the amount of surrender, surrendered by the assessee during the course of search and seizure, as business income as against the "Income from other sources" held by the AO.2. The brief background of the present case is that during the search of the business premises of the assessee, the assessee made a declaration of Rs. 20 lacs and surrendered the same representing unaccounted stock found in the factory, jewellery seized from lockers, etc.3. The amount declared by the assessee was credited to the P&L a/c and the appellant in the return filed claimed deductions under Section 80-1 of the IT Act. It needs to be mentioned here itself that in the statement recorded during the proc...

District Excise Officer Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. These eleven appeals by the two assessees are directed against the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on December 31, 2001, in relation to the assessment years 1989-90 to 1997-98 except 1994-95 in relation to the District Excise Officer, Muzaffarnagar, and in relation to the assessment years 1994-95 to 1996-97 for the District Excise Officer, Saharanpur. Since all these appeals are based on identical facts and common grounds of appeal, we are therefore proceeding to dispose of these appeals by a consolidated order for the sake of convenience.2. The grounds of appeal raised by assessee, District Excise Officer, Muzaffarnagar, with regard to the assessment year 1989-90 are as under : "1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in not following the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated August 1, 2001, in I. T. A. No. 3226/Delhi of 1996 for the financial year 1993-94 in the case of the app...