Delhi Court March 2003 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
Prashant Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Banaras Marbles and Granites Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2003IVAD(Delhi)20; [2005]127CompCas597(Delhi); 105(2003)DLT497; 2003(71)DRJ683; [2003]46SCL295(Delhi)
Mukul Mudgal, J.1. This is a winding up petition filed under Sections 433(c) and 433(f) read with Section 439(1)(c) of the Companies Act. The petitioner's claim is that the respondent company had the authorized capital of Rs. 1 crore divided into 10,00,000 equity shares of Rs.10 each. The petitioner company holds 2,80,300 shares of Rs.10/- each. The case of the petitioner company in this winding up petition is that it was persuaded to invest in the respondent company on the basis of its projected profitability and accordingly the petitioner company purchased 2,80,300 equity shares of Rs. 10/- each and paid a sum of Rs. 28,030,000/- to the respondent company. There are also averments in the petition regarding notice of cancellation of allotment of a valuable plot in NOIDA and non-completion of the factory to be constructed thereon. The petition also avers that the forfeiture of the plot by the order of the NOIDA authority has occurred and that the respondent has not commenced its busine...
Rani Pushpa Kumari Devi (Deceased Through Lr) Vs. the Embassy of Syria ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2003IIIAD(Delhi)216; 104(2003)DLT682; 2003(71)DRJ482A
B.N. Chaturvedi, J. 1. This suit for possession and recovery of damages for use and occupation of the premises No. 15, Palam Marg, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi was filed by Rani Pushpa Kumari Devi, wife of late Dr. Nagendra Singh, claiming herself as owner-landlady of the aforesaid premises. The suit property was let out to the defendant under two separate lease agreements executed on 31st of December, 1985. One agreement pertaining to the entire suit property was executed between late Dr. Nagendra Singh as KARTA of HUF, Smt. Indira Kumari, Smt. Sarla Kumari, both daughters of late Yadvendra Singh, and Raj Singh S/o Shri Luxman Singhjee of Dungarpur on one hand and the defendant, the Embassy of Syrian Arab Republic on the other. The other lease agreement was entered into in respect of ground floor, a servant quarter, one motor garage, lawns and garden between Mrs. Indira Kumari and Mrs. Sarla Kumari, both daughters of late Yadvendra Singh and Shri Raj Singh S/o Shri Laxman Singhjee of Dunga...
Smt. Chhoti Devi Vs. the Financial Commissioner and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2003IIIAD(Delhi)722; 104(2003)DLT635; 2003(68)DRJ387
A.K. Sikri, J.1. The petitioner herein was married to Shri Sardar Singh. The petitioner is issueless. Her husband Shri Sardar Singh, when this marriage with petitioner was still subsisting, married to one Smt. Gindori, widow of Shri Mange. Shri Mange was real brother of Shri Sardar Singh. Out of this marriage between Shri Sardar Singh and Smt.Gindori, three children were born, viz., Respondents 3 and 4 as well as father of respondents 5 and 6 late Shri Ranbir Singh. Shri Sardar Singh died in the year 1979. He was Bhumidar of the land in dispute bearing Khasra No.132 (2-2), 79 (0-6), 6/15 (0-11) and 16 min. (0-9) comprised in Khata No.144 situated at Village Bamnoli, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the `suit land'). On the death of Shri Sardar Singh, suit land was mutated in the name of the petitioner and three children of late Sardar Singh, namely, respondents 3, 4 and Shri Ranbir Singh in equal shares vide mutation order dated 19.10.79 passed by Naib Tehsildar (Palam). Proceedings r...
Sailesh Textile Industries Vs. British Airways and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2003IVAD(Delhi)276; 2003(69)DRJ683
C.K. Mahajan, J.1. By way of this suit, the plaintiff seeks to recover a sum of Rs.2,51,663.75 along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realisation against settlement of their claims towards value of the cost of goods, freight, insurance, etc. 2. Briefly the facts are, plaintiff entered into a contract with one M/s. Yassin Hussein Adham of Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) for export of 7,000 pieces of 'Hand Embroidered Terrywool Rumals: All white' of a total value of Rs.3,57,000/-. The plaintiff exported the above material in three consignments through defendant No.1. The third consignment of goods consisting of 2,997 pieces of the said Rumals was exported vide Airway Bill No.125-63405226 dated 7th October 1976. A sum of Rs.14,693.75 was pre-paid towards freight charges. The said goods were insured by defendant No.2 for which a premium of Rs.1,025/- was also paid by the plaintiff. Plaintiff handed over the relevant documents to defendant No.3 who discounted the...
Bawana Relocated Ind. Plot Owners Vs. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi and anr ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2003IIIAD(Delhi)581; 104(2003)DLT177; 2003(70)DRJ118
A.K. Sikri, J.1. The petitioners in this batch of writ petitions are those who had to shut down their industrial undertakings in Delhi pursuant to the orders passed by the Supreme Court in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India as these industrial units were in non-conforming/residential areas. While appreciating and being sensitive to the problem of pollution created by such units which were operating in non-conforming/residential areas and imminent need to shift them to industrial areas, in the interest of clean environment in Delhi, the respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 2 had taken policy decision to develop proper industrial areas for relocating these industries. This policy decision was taken some time in the year 1996, i.e., before the final the orders were passed by the Supreme Court directing closing down of these industrial units operating from non-conforming/residential areas which orders were passed in the year 2000-01.2. The Commissioner of Industries of the Government ...
Ashwini Kumar and ors. Vs. University of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2003IVAD(Delhi)456; AIR2003Delhi304; 104(2003)DLT748; 2003(68)DRJ502
A.K. Sikri, J. 1. This writ petition is filed by four petitioners who are students of University of Delhi. They are research scholars doing research in different fields in the departments under Delhi University. Petitioner No. 1 is doing his Ph.D in Buddhist Studies, Petitioner No. 2 is doing his LL.M. Petitioner No. 3 is doing his Ph.D in African Studies and the petitioner No. 4 is a student of M.Phil with the Department of Botany. They were provided accommodation in Jubilee Hall and were occupying room Nos. 130, 192, 171 and 38 respectively in the said hostel. 2. Jubilee Hall is a hostel for post-graduate students and is run under the overall supervision of the respondent No. 1 through the Provost. The Resident Tutor and the Warden are the three principal officers appointed in this regard for the smooth conduct of the affairs of Jubilee Hall. The scheme for the management of the affairs of Jubilee Hall provides for the participation of the residents/students of Jubilee Hall. There is...
Asha Ahuja Vs. Rajesh Ahuja and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 104(2003)DLT745; II(2003)DMC16; 2003(68)DRJ437
R.C. Chopra, J. 1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code' only) is directed against an order dated 3.2.2000 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi by which a Revision Petition filed by the petitioner/complainant against an order dated 21.10.1997 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate discharging the accused under Section 498-A, IPC was dismissed. 2. The petitioner/complainant had filed a complaint against respondent Nos. 1 to 4 on the basis of which FIR No. 252/1995 under Sections 498-A/406, IPC wasregistered at PS Rajouri Garden, New Delhi. After investigations charge-sheet under Section 173 of the Code was filed. Learned Metropolitan Magistrate declined to frame a charge against the respondents under Section 498-A of the IPC in view of the bar created by Section 468 of the Code as the FIR had been filed beyond a period of three years. However, charge under Section 406, IPC was ordered to be framed agains...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. A.R.J. Security Printers
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: (2003)183CTR(Del)323; [2003]264ITR276(Delhi)
D.K. Jain, J. 1. These three appeals, by the Revenue, under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') are directed against the orders passed by the Tribunal, New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal), in ITA Nos. 2062/Del/1996, 3676 & 3122/Del/1997 and 3157/Del/1999, pertaining the asst. yrs. 1991-92, 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1996-97, respectively.Since a common issue is involved in all the three appeals, these are being disposed of by this order.2. The issue involved in the appeals is as to whether the assessed, engaged in the business of printing of lottery tickets, can be said to be an industrial undertaking engaged in the manufacture or production of articles or things and, thereforee, entitled to deduction under Section 80-I of the Act.3. Incidentally, in none of the assessment orders or in the order of the Tribunal we find any discussion on the issue. The AOs merely note that the claim preferred by the assessed under Section 80-I cannot be allowed because similar relief has be...
Pasupati Fabrics Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2003IVAD(Delhi)154; 107(2003)DLT15; 2004(165)ELT35(Del)
A.K. Sikri, J.-1. Petitioner No. 1, which is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, is a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU). Petitioner No. 2 is its Company Secretary and General Manager (Admn.). In this writ petition, petitioners are challenging the action of the respondent No. 3 in demanding Textile Cess levied under Section 5A of the Textile Committee Act, 1963 (hereinafter to be referred as 'Act' for short) from the petitioner No. 1 (hereinafter called as 'petitioner company 'for short'). The case of the petitioners is that as the petitioner company is a 100% EOU, it is exempted from payment of such cess. It is not in dispute that the petitioner company is otherwise exempted from payment of excise duty and other Central levies being 100% EOU. 2. The facts are in narrow compass and, may be noted in the first instance.3. The petitioner company has been set up for manufacture of cotton fabrics. It applied to the respondents 1 and 2 for grant of permission/license to set u...
Pramod Kumar and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2004(73)DRJ125; (2004)IILLJ432Del
D.K. Jain, J.1. A common order, dated 31 December 1997, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal'), in O.A. No. 1670/92 and two other applications, is under challenge in this writ petition. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has declined to interfere with the penalty of removal from service imposed on the petitioners. Since the issue involved in all the three cases is identical, these are being disposed of by this order. However, we shall treat the facts of Pramod Kumar as illustrative.2. The petitioner, Pramod Kumar, a Substitute Loco Cleaner, working under Loco Foreman, Northern Railway, Moradabad, was proceeded against in departmental disciplinary proceedings for allegedly producing fake casual labour service card showing 380 days of service as casual labour under Inspector of Works, Balamau to his credit during the period 1978-1982; forging the signatures of Shri S.P. Jutla, the then Inspector of Works; securing employment ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »