Delhi Court April 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.
Bijender Singh Vs. University of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2002
Reported in: 2002IVAD(Delhi)575; 97(2002)DLT598; 2003(1)SLJ103(Delhi)
Mahmood Ali Khan, J. 1. This petition is filed under Section 2(b), 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act for punishing the respondent R.B. Solanki, acting Principal of B.R. Ambedkar College for committing willful and deliberate contempt of this court by disobeying the directions contained in the order of this Court dated 27.10.1999. 2. The facts leading to this petition, briefly stated, are that the petitioner was appointed as Ad hoc Junior Assistant-cum-Typist (JACT) in B.R. Ambedkar College w.e.f. 1.1.1997. With some breaks his adhoc appointment was extended from time to time. In June 1999 he filed CWP No. 3750 of 1999 for regularisation of his appointment to the post of JACT. This Court disposed of the said writ petition by order dated 27.10.1999. Operative portion of this order, being relevant, is reproduced as under: 'In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the prayer made by the petitioner cannot be granted. The only direction which can be given is that the services of the peti...
Sh. Samiullah Khan and anr. Vs. Krishan Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2002
Reported in: II(2002)ACC217; 2003ACJ1744
R.C. Chopra, J.1. The appellants are the unfortunate parents of the deceased who died in a road accident at the age of about 17 years. The appellants filed a petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 claiming compensation of Rs. 50,000/-. Learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in S.No. 208 of 1978 passed an award of Rs. 40,800/- in their favor. The Tribunal upheld the plea of the appellants that the deceased was rendering services to them, the value of which was Rs. 200 per month. He applied a multiplier of 17 to the multiplicand of Rs. 2400/- per month. However, the learned Tribunal awarded interest @ 12 per cent per annum from the date of orders till realisation only. He did not award any interest on the awarded amount from the date of the filing of the petition till the date of the award.2. None appeared for the parties. I have gone through the Trial Court records and the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal.3. The appellants themselves had pleaded that t...
Debra Clare Seymour Vs. Pradeep Arnold Seymour
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2002
Reported in: 2002IVAD(Delhi)499; 98(2002)DLT34; II(2002)DMC144; 2002(63)DRJ375
J.D. Kapoor, J.1. The parties are Christians. The petitioner wife had initially sought a decree for judicial separation on the ground of cruelty but subsequently converted it into a petition for dissolution of marriage though under Section 10 of the India Divorce Act, 1869, a Christian wife subjected to cruelty cannot seek divorce on the ground of cruelty alone unless it is accompanied with the ground of adultery whereas a Christian husband can dissolve the marriage on the ground of adultery alone. Relevant extracts of Section 10 are as under:-'10. When husband may petition for dissolution Any husband may present a petition to the District Court or to the High Court, praying that his marriage may be dissolved on the ground that his wife has, since the solemnization thereof, been guilty of adultery. When wife may petition for dissolution - Any wife may present a petition to the District Court or to the High Court, praying that her marriage may be dissolved on the ground that, since the ...
Deputy Cit Vs. Mahendra Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-01-2002
Reported in: (2002)76TTJ(Del)257
In the ITAT, Delhi A Bench Sikander Khan, A.M & Y.K. Kapur, J.M.Order Y.K. Kapur, J.M.These two appeals of the revenue arise out of a common order passed by Commissioner (Appeals), 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 Commissioner (Appeals) in directing the assessing officer to treat the amount of surrender, surrendered by the assessed during the course of search and seizure, as business income as against the 'Income from other sources' held by the assessing officer.2. The brief background of the present case is that during the search of the business premises of the assessed, the assessed made a declaration of Rs. 20 lakhs and surrendered the same representing unaccounted stock found in the factory, jewellery seized from lockers, etc.3. The amount declared by the assessed was credited to the profit and loss account and the appellant...
- ‹ Prev
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- Next ›