Delhi Court September 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.
Hari Om Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ979; 100(2002)DLT225; 2002(84)ECC768
J.D. Kapoor, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment dated 11th December, 2000 whereby appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 18 of NDPS Act for being found in possession of 1 k.g. of opium and the order of sentence dated 13th December, 2000 whereby he was awarded 10 years RI and a fine of Rs. 1 lakh and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years.2. Admittedly appellant was arrested on 21.7.1999 and since then he is in jail and serving sentence. Learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Sumeet Verma has fairly conceded that conviction be maintained but has confined his arguments on the quantum of sentences. Mr. Verma seeks to avail benefit of amended provisions of Section 18 of NDPS Act which provides that if a person is found to be in possession of a small quantity, he can be visited with sentence for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both. He further contends t...
Shri Yatendra Nath Gupta Vs. Shri Jagdish Chander Sharma and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Delhi267; 101(2002)DLT59
S.K. Agarwal, J.By this application under Order 14 Rules 3 and 5 read with 151 CPC, defendants are seeking amendment or framing of the additional issue.1. Plaintiff filed the suit against the defendants or recovery of possession of the premises bearing Nos. E-16 and E-40, Connaught Place New Delhi and mesne profits etc. The case set up by the plaintiff is that R.L. Sharma (father of defendant Nos. 1 and 2), was employed with late Lala Amar Nath (father of plaintiff), who died in the year 1932, leaving behind his widow, two minor daughters and ten month old son (plaintiff). There was no adult male member in the family to look after his business. R.L. Sharma was asked to stay and look after the interest of the minor (plaintiff). In order to enable him to discharge the duties entrusted to him, R.L. Sharma was allowed occupation (as an employee only) of a flat in the mezzanine floor of property No. E-16, Connaught Place, New Delhi (the suit property), and when he fell sick and was bed ridd...
Braham Singh Tyagi and ors. Vs. State of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: 100(2002)DLT718; I(2003)DMC128
Mahmood Ali Khan, J.1. This criminal revision is filed under Section 397 of the Cr.P.C. against the order of an Additional Sessions Judge framing charges under Section 498A and Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC against the petitioner accused. 2. Briefly stated the facts are that the complainant Ms. Seems Tyagi lodged a report with the police on 17.10.1998 that she was married to Sunil Tyagi on 12.12.1998 in accordance with Hindu rites and thereafter went to live with her husband and other members of his family, the petitioners herein, and that the husband and his other relatives had been causing her mental and physical torture in order to coerce her and her relatives to give more dowry and money. It was alleged by her that her brother was satisfying their demands but still her harassment by the petitioners continued unabated although she had sent for money from her parents to satisfy them. On her complaint a case under Section 498A IPC was registered. On the same day she made a supp...
Pratap Singh Yadav and anr. Vs. Atal Behari Pandey
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ705; 100(2002)DLT673; 2003(66)DRJ101
Mahmood Ali Khan, J.1. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 Cr.P.C. is directed against an order of an Additional Sessions Judge dated 7.5.2002 by which he has served notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. for the trial of the petitioners for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act (the Act).2. The relevant facts for appreciating the controversy on merit are that the petitioners are father and son respectively. They are residents of Bangalore. Petitioner No. 1, who was carrying on business there, had taken a friendly loan of Rs. 1,50,000/- from the respondent. Respondent was also residing in Bangalore and was in employment there. Petitioner No. 1 issued a cheque for re-payment of the loan amount. The cheque was dishonoured on presentation which led to the filing of a criminal complaint by the respondent at Bangalore for the prosecution of petitioner No. 1 under Section 138 of the Act. However, the matter was compromised between the parties. Petitioner No. 1 paid a...
Kumari Mithlesh Rohila Vs. Moti Ram Memorial Girls Sr. Sec. School
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: 100(2002)DLT189
ORDERManmohan Sarin, J.1. Learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 has handed over Memorandum bearing No. DE.17/3/Misc./Sch/96-97/13590 to 15890, dated 20.7.2001, issued by the Directorate of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi. The said memorandum sets out the admission criteria for class XI. The relevant extract is reproduced as under:'2. Admission criteria for class XI:The admission criteria for admission to class XI for the year 2001-02 will continue to be the same as it was last year. However, it is reproduced again for the same of ready reference.For Humanities: A student must have been declared passed by the CBSE at the Secondary School Examination.For Commerce: A student declared passed at the Secondary School Examination must have secured 40% marks in aggregate.For Science: A student declared passed at the Secondary School Examination must have secured at least 50% marks in aggregate or 85 marks in Science and Mathematics in aggregate. In both the cases the student must have sec...
Jitender Singh @ Motu and ors. Vs. State Govt. of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2388; 101(2002)DLT118; 2003(66)DRJ490
Mahmood Ali Khan, J.1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.PC for setting aside the order of a Metropolitan Magistrate dated 9.1.2002 by which she had taken cognizance of the offence under Section 323/394/397 read with Section 506(II) IPC against the petitioner Jitender Singh @ Motu, Inder Pal Singh @ Billo and Harvinder Pal Singh @ Meena to stand trial in the case Along with co-accused.2. The facts giving rise to this petition, briefly stated, are that a case FIR No. 295/95 was registered at P.S. Inderpuri on 19.11.1995 for offences under Section 394 and 506 IPC. This case was registered on the complaint of one Sanjay. The complainant alleged in the FIR that he was a student and on 19.11.1995 at about 9 AM he went out to buy sweets at Aggarwal Sweets, Main Bazar, Inderpuri. He met four boys Kaku (accused Gurvinder Pal Singh), Billo (Inder Pal Singh), Motu (Jitender Singh) and Meena (Harvinder Pal Singh) who were known to him from before as they also resided in the...
Mukesh Singh and Sampat Mukherjee Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: [2003]116CompCas72(Delhi)
Mahmood Ali Khan, J.1. Mukesh Singh petitioner in CRLMM No. 343/02 ands Sampat Mukherjee petitioner in CRLMM No. 1863/02 have applied for grant of bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.2. Both these petitioners are accused in one case thereforee, their applications may be conveniently decided by a common order.3. The case was registered on the complainant of one R.N. Govil on 2.9.1998 on the allegation, briefly stated, the cheating of the complainant of a big sum of money by directors and management of M/s. Naturoworth Artificial Energy and Fuels Ltd. The company started its operation around June, 1997, with chairman cum managing director R.S. Chauhan, M.D. Dr. Rajesh Harsh and Sanjay Singh, Mukesh Singh, Sampat Mukherjee, Smt. Anita Harsh and Smt. Indu Singh as directors. All of them entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat the complainant and in furtherance of their objective they started visiting the house of the complainant in December, 1997. They painted a rosy picture of their ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Amber Tours (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: (2004)186CTR(Del)388
D.K. Jain, J. 1. These matters have been placed before the Court for appropriate orders as the Revenue, at whose instance the references have been made, has failed to file the paper books. Since, in our view, answer to the question referred stands concluded by the decisions of the apex Court in CIT v. Hero Cycles (P) Ltd. and Ors. : [1997]228ITR463(SC) and CIT v. Stepwell Industries Ltd. and Ors. : [1997]228ITR171(SC) as also of this Court in CIT v. International Exporters : [1998]233ITR23(Delhi) , we dispense with the filing of paper books and proceed to dispose of the matters.2. The question, common to both the references, referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench (for short 'the Tribunal') under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, arising out of ITA Nos. 4899 & 4900/Del/1981, is as under :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessed-company, who is rendering services to the foreign tourists only in ...
Cartier International B.V. Vs. Choosy Corner and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: 2003(26)PTC160(Del)
R.C. Chopra, J.1. This suit for permanent injunction on account of infringement of trade mark, passing off, rendition of accounts of profit and delivery up was filed by the plaintiff against the defendants alleging that the plaintiff is a Corporation organized and existing under the laws of Netherlands having its registered office at Amsterdam. The House of 'CARTIER' was established in Paris in 1847 and with the passage of time, the name 'Cartier' symbolized a life style and philosophy that was acted out with exemplary taste and a whole range of products under the name of 'Cartier' were marketed by the plaintiff. Over past 150 years, 'Cartier' has built up and maintained its reputation for imaginative and distinctive designs in jewellery, watches and clocks, leather-ware, pens, perfumes, lighters, scarves, cigarettes, eyewear, tableware, cutlery, porcelain, crystal and candlestands, etc. In India also since 1909, the 'Cartier' products were being enjoyed by the Maharajas and Princes an...
Cit Vs. Amber Tours (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2002
Reported in: [2002]125TAXMAN451(Delhi)
ORDERD.K. Jain, J. These matters have been placed before the court for appropriate orders as the revenue, at whose instance the references have been made, has failed to file the paper books. Since, in our view, answer to the question referred stands concluded by the decisions of the Apex Court in CIT v. Hero Cycles (P) Ltd. : [1997]228ITR463(SC) and CIT v. Stepwell Industries Ltd. : [1997]228ITR171(SC) as also of this court in CIT v. International Exporters : [1998]233ITR23(Delhi) , we dispense with the filing of paper books and proceed to dispose of the matters.2. The question, common to both the references, referred by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench-C (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arising out of ITRs No. 4899 & 4900 (Delhi)/ 1981, is as under :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessed-company, who is rendering services to the foreign tou...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »