Delhi Court May 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.
G.S. Dhillon Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-17-2002
Reported in: 98(2002)DLT341; 2003(66)DRJ361
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. This order will dispose of applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and Section 330 Cr.P.C. read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. for bail in the case FIR No. 129/97 under Sections 3, 5, 9, of OS Act P.S. Chanakayapuri.2. Facts in brief are that on 27th April, 1997 petitioner Gurdev Singh Dhillon, then working as Travel Agent was apprehended, while he was going to the family quarters of Pakistan High Commissioner, New Delhi. Four documents containing sensitive and secret information relating to the defense matters of the country were recovered from him: He was arrested in the above noted case. After investigations, challan was filed and the matter is pending trial. By order dated 28th August, 2000, he was granted interim bail for five months on the ground of his ill health; the interim bail was to expire on 26th January, 2001 and he moved another application on 17th January, 2001. The interim bail was extended for another period of six months again on the ground of sickness. P...
Smt. Pamela Manmohan Singh Vs. Uttam Chand Trust and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-17-2002
Reported in: 98(2002)DLT392
J.D. Kapoor, J.1. The conspectus of facts as culled out from the pleadings need to be recapitulated for deciding the following preliminary issues arising out of the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.1. Whether the suit is barred by limitation?2. Whether there is no cause of action available to the plaintiff, if so, its effect?2. Plaintiff is the daughter of late Dr. (Mrs.) Raseel Kohli. She was Dr. Ms. Raseel Rekhi when she purchased the suit property. Defendant No. 1 is a Trust whereas defendant No. 2 is the Trustee. Smt. Channo Devi was the grand mother of the plaintiff and mother of Dr. Ms. Raseel Rekhi. Defendant No. 2 is the son of Smt. Channo Devi whereas defendant No. 3 is another daughter of Smt. Channo Devi. Defendant Nos. 5(a) to 5(d) are the legal heirs of the deceased son of Dr.(Mrs.) Raseel Kohli (for the purpose of facts will be referred as Dr. Ms. Rekhi).3. Case of the plaintiff in brief is as under:-Dr. Ms. Rekhi purchased the suit property on 19.2.1930 from her own...
Modipon Limited and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(85)ECC790; 2002(146)ELT45(Del)
Dalveer Bhandari, J.1. The petitioners have preferred a writ petition before this Court with manifold prayers, but the principal grievance of the petitioners is that the benefits which were given to them by Notification dated 23.4.1980 (as amended by Notification dated 5.6.1982) were taken away by the subsequent Notification dated 21.10.1982.2. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the case, we deem it appropriate to set out the relevant portion of the Notification dated 23.4.1980, as amended by the Notification dated 5.6.1982 and Notification dated 21.10.1982.Notification dated 23.4.80 as amended on 5.6.82 'Exemption to Caprolactum:- In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Department of Revenue and Banking No. 117-Customs, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts caprolactum, falling under sub-heading No...
Pritam Singh @ Pappu Vs. State (Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-17-2002
Reported in: 2003(69)DRJ638
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. This is an application under Section 439 read with Section 482 Cr. P.C. for grant of bail in case FIR No. 635/2000 under Section 302 IPC P.S. Punjabi Bagh.2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner was arrested in the above notice case on 1st August, 2000 ; that allegations against him are false and on 23rd May, 2001, taking into consideration the nature of allegations, prosecution was directed to conclude its evidence within three months and the following order was passed :'Learned counsel for the State on instructions from S.I. Pramod Kumar submits that all witnesses have been examined and the case is fixed for prosecution evidence on 29th May, 2001. Trial Court is directed to complete the evidence within three months from the next day fixed. In case the evidence is not completed during stipulated period, petitioner shall have the liberty to move an application for bail.'3. The said period expired on 29th August, 2001. Learned counsel for the petitio...
Himtaj Ayurvedic Udyog Kendra Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: May-16-2002
Reported in: (2002)(144)ELT698TriDel
1. These are six appeals arising out of common adjudication order dated 31-10-2000 involving the issue of classification of Himtaj Tel and consequently demand of duty and penalty imposed on all the appellants.2. Shri R. Swaminathan, learned Consultant, appearing on behalf of Himtaj Ayurvedic Udyog Kendra and Shri K.K. Pandey submitted that the issue regarding classification of Himtaj Tel has been settled by the Larger Bench of the Appellate Tribunal vide Misc. Order Nos. 50-51 /2001-C, dated 13-12-2001, 2001 (139) E.L.T. 610 (Tri.-LB) that according to the Larger Bench Himtaj Tel has to be classified as an ayurvedic medicine under sub-heading 3003.30 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act. The learned Consultant, further, submitted that the Central Excise duty has been demanded from them for the period from 17-8-90 to September, 1995 under the show cause notice dated 3-9-97 and as such the entire demand is time-barred; that since 1987, the issue was known to the Department i...
Malti Gulati and anr. Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.
Court: DRAT Delhi
Decided on: May-16-2002
Reported in: I(2003)BC70
1. This appeal has been filed by two persons, namely, Ms. Malti Gulati and Shri Adarsh Gulati. They were defendant Nos. 6 and 7, respectively, in O.A. No. 374/95 -- Punjab National Bank v. M/s. Sakar Contracts India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.2. This appeal is against order dated 28.5.1997 passed by the Tribunal below in the aforesaid O.A. The grievance of the appellants is that even though the appellants were neither the borrower of the loan nor the guarantor still the entire loan liability with interest has been decreed against them jointly and severally along with the rest of the defendants who were either the borrowers or the guarantors. The appellants contend that for the loan, they had only mortgaged their property and, therefore, their liability was only to the extent of the value of the mortgaged property. They say that the decree against them ought to have been limited to the sale of the mortgaged property and not a personal decree against them.3. On facts, I find that the O.A. of the...
Khazan Singh and anr. Vs. Basheer Ahmed and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-16-2002
Reported in: II(2002)ACC724; 2003ACJ1971; 2002VIIIAD(Delhi)576; 98(2002)DLT615; 2002(64)DRJ178
R.C. Chopra, J.1. Appellants, the unfortunate parents, of deceased child Raj Kumar have come in appeal praying for enhancement of compensation awarded by learned MACT in Suit No. 154/87 decided on 7.4.1997. The Tribunal had awarded a compensation of Rs. 83100/- with interest @ 12 per cent per annum to the appellants on account of death of deceased who was aged about 14 years at the time of his death in the accident on 13.11.1983.2. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for respondent No. 3. I have gone through the Trial Court Records.3. The facts relevant for the disposal of this appeal, briefly stated, are that deceased Raj Kumar a child aged about 14 years had met with an accident with Tuck No. DLG-216 on 13.11.1983 and sustained fatal injuries. The appellants who are the father and mother of the deceased filed a claim petition alleging that the accident in question was on account of rash and negligent driving on the part of respondent No. 1. The respond...
Walchand Nagar Industries Ltd. Vs. Cement Corpn. of India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-16-2002
Reported in: 2002VAD(Delhi)184; 2002(3)ARBLR585(Delhi); 99(2002)DLT316; 2002(63)DRJ633
Vijender Jain, J.1. Letter of Intent dated 31st March, 1983 was issued in favor of the petitioner/Watchband Nagar Industries Ltd. (hereinafter referred to the 'WIL') for supply, erection and Commissioning of a Clinkerisation package for 3000 tonnes per day at respondent/objector's/Cement Corporation of India's (hereinafter referred to the 'CCI') Plant at Yerraguntla Distt. Cuddapah Andhra Pradesh. Disputes arose between the parties and parties appointed Sh.Y.V. Chandrachud, retired Chief Justice of India as the sole Arbitrator. The Sole Arbitrator awarded a sum of Rs. 6,50,74,341/= along with interest @ Rs. 12 per annum w.e.f. 3.1.1989 until payment. The Arbitrator made his Award on 26th April, 1995.2. Mr. V.R. Reddy, learned counsel appearing for CCI has contended that the Arbitrator has not made any reference to the additional counter claim filed by CCI for Rs. 143.29 crores on account of discontinuance of the work by the will during the arbitration proceedings. Arbitrator during the...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Deep Kanta and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-16-2002
Reported in: 2003ACJ1369; 2002VIIIAD(Delhi)26; 98(2002)DLT209; 2002(64)DRJ582
R.C. Chopra, J. 1. The Delhi Transport Corporation assails an order dated 27th July, 1995 passed by learned MACT in case No. 19/83 awarding compensation of Rs. 3,07,000/- in favor of respondent/claimants on account of the death of Shri Ashok Kumar husband of the claimant/respondent No. 1 is an accident with a DTC bus on 23.8.1982.2. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents 1, 2 and 3. I have gone through the Trial Court Records. None has appeared for respondent No. 4, the driver of the offending vehicle.3. The facts relevant for the disposal of this appeal, briefly stated, are that respondents 1, 2 and 3 filed a claim petition under Section 110 of the Motor Vehicle Act 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act only) against the appellant and respondent No. 4 alleging that on 23.8.1982 at about 9.50 PM when Ashok Kumar aged about 27 years was going on his two wheeler Scooter, the DTC bus No. DHP 2717 which was being driver by respondent No. 4...
Dr. Raman Kumar Attrey Vs. Employees' State Insurance Corpn. and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-16-2002
Reported in: 99(2002)DLT68; (2002)IIILLJ1050Del
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. The original applicant before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Tribunal') is the writ petitioner herein. He was appointed as 'IMO Gr. II Doctor' on a contractual basis for a period of six months on a fixed remuneration of Rs. 2,200/- per month plus usual allowances as admissible. He questioned the said Order by filing an original application before the Tribunal, which was marked as O.A. No. 230 of 1988. The said application was disposed of by an Order dated 03.06.1993 with a direction upon the respondents to allow the petitioners to appear before the Selection Board for consideration for regularization subject to their eligibility and in case they were found suitable, they should be regularized subject to availability of vacancies. The respondents were also directed to grant age relaxation to the petitioner to the extent he had rendered services in the respondent Corporation.2. The petitioner was not re...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »