Delhi Court October 2007 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.
Terumo Penpol Ltd. and ors. Vs. the Nct of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-04-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ2261; 2007(98)DRJ706
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. Petitioners have been imp leaded as accused in a complaint filed by the second respondent under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. alleging that petitioners have committed an offence under Section 499/500 IPC. Petitioners pray that the said complaint being complaint case No. 1183/1/2003 titled J.Mitra and Co. v. Terumo Penpol Ltd. and Anr. be quashed.2. Government of the allegations against the petitioners culled out from the complainant is that the complainant and first petitioner were competitors in the same business i.e. manufacturing and supplying blood bags. A tender was floated by the Delhi State Aids Control Society, Government of NCT Delhi. Pursuant thereto complainant and first petitioner had submitted offers and in support of their respective products had furnished the requisite literature. The tender inquiry pertained to supply of blood bags. Along with the literature submitted with the offer, first petitioner had submitted a graph under the caption:-'Is venepunc...
Rajesh Dalal Vs. State (Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-04-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ937
R.S. Sodhi, J.1. Criminal Appeal Nos. 800 of 2003 and 129 of 2004 seek to challenge the judgment and order of Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, in Sessions Case No. 23 of 2001, arising out of F.I.R. No. 1059 of 1999, Police Station Paschim Vihar, whereby learned judge vide his judgment dated 30.10.2003 has held the appellants, namely, Rajesh Dalal and Pankaj Gambhir, guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 120B I.P.C. and under Section 364A/120B I.P.C. Further vide his order dated 31.10.2003, has sentenced the appellants to imprisonment for life for offence punishable under Section 364A/120B I.P.C. together with fine of Rs. 500/- each and in default of payment of fine, Rigorous Imprisonment for one year each.2. Brief facts of the case as have been noted by learned Additional Sessions Judge in his judgment under challenge are as follows:.that on 23.12.99 at about 1.35 p.m., Mrs. Vijaya Awasthy was going to fetch her son Saurabh, who was a student in St. Saviour Public School, B...
Jasjeet Films Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-04-2007
Reported in: (2008)218CTR(Del)185; [2008]298ITR166(Delhi)
ORDER1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), relevant to the Assessment Year 1981-82 the following question has been referred for our opinion:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal') is justified in holding that the liability to pay interest was contractual liability and that the said liability having been questioned by the assessed and the matter being subjudice the contractual liability had not accrued and arisen during the previous year under consideration and thereforee, the disallowance of Rs. 79,220/- was rightly made by the Income Tax Officer?2. The assessed was allotted a plot of land by the Delhi Development Authority ('DDA') for the construction of a cinema building. As required by the terms of the lease entered into between the assessed and the DDA, the assessed completed the construction in August, 1970. On 5th September, 1970 the DDA issued an occupancy certificate t...
Dr. Subramanian Swamy Vs. Election Commission of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-04-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Delhi19; 2008(100)DRJ298
Mukundakam Sharma, C.J.1. The present writ petition is filed by Dr.Subramanian Swamy, who claims himself to be the President of Janata Party.2. By filing the said petition, the petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of paragraph 10A of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968. Another prayer which is incorporated in the writ petition is that the aforesaid para 10A should be re-drafted in line with requirement of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. One of the contentions that were raised was that the Janata Party, although is not a recognised political party today, cannot be deprived of the exclusive use of its election symbol known as 'Chakra Haldhar', which was a reserved symbol of Janata Party when it was functioning as a recognised national political party.3. It is an admitted position that the said Janata Party lost its status as a national party due to its inability to get requisite percentage of votes and seats in the Legislature in the gen...
Sanjeev Nagpal and ors. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-04-2007
Reported in: 147(2008)DLT498; I(2008)DMC470; 2007(98)DRJ510
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.Crl. M.A. No. 11780/061. This is an application for restoration of Crl. M.C. 914/03.2. Cause shown is sufficient. Crl. M.A. 11780/06 is allowed.3. Crl. M.C. 914/03 is restored.Crl. M.C. No. 914/031. This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing the FIR No. 16/2003 registered at P.S. Kirti Nagar under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC and the proceedings arising out of the said FIR.2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the marriage between petitioner No. 1, Sanjeev Nagpal and respondent No. 2, Sonia Nagpal was solemnized on 19.8.96 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. Unfortunately, the marriage turned sour and they started living separately since June, 2001. A boy named Shrey was born to the parties.3. A complaint dated 7.1.2003 was filed by the respondent No. 2 against the petitioner No. 1, his father (petitioner No. 2), mother (petitioner No. 3), sister (petitioner No. 5) and brother-in-law (petitioner No. 4). The complaint contai...
Bhilwara Processors Vs. C.C.E.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2007
Reported in: (2008)(125)ECC44
1. The authorities below have rejected the claim of the appellant herein for refund of Rs. 1,38,70,221/- on the ground that the claim is hit by the bar of unjust enrichment enshrined in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944.None appears for the appellant inspite of notice, hence we heard Ld. DR and perused the records.2. The claim for refund was initially rejected by the Asstt. Collector by his order dt. 29.5.90 on the ground of time bar as well as on merits. This order was appealed against before Collector(Appeals) who vide order dt. 25.10.91 upheld the rejection of the claim. The matter was carried further in appeal to the Tribunal which vide order No.223/99-A dt.4.3.99 set aside the rejection on the ground of time bar but remanded the issue for reconsideration with respect to unjust enrichment after ascertaining as to whether duty liability was passed on by the appellants to their buyers. On remand, fresh order was passed by the Asstt. Commissioner on 11.1.01 holding that the...
Padmini Technologies Limited and anr. Vs. Nishith Kumar and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(98)DRJ700; 2007(122)ECC420; 2007(148)LC420(Delhi); 2008(225)ELT424(Del)
Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C has been preferred by the petitioners for quashing the sanction and authorization for prosecution given by respondent No.2 and the consequent proceedings and order of taking cognizance by the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate dated 27th April, 2006 in a complaint under Sections 135(1)(a) and 135(b) of the Customs Act filed by the Customs Authorities.2. A perusal of the sanction order and the complaint shows that after receipt of intelligence about the petitioners indulging in clandestine removal of the goods from Noida Export Processing Zone with the help of security staff, surveillance was kept and on 9th January, 1997, a tempo bearing registration No.MH-01-F-405 and a truck bearing number DL-1-LC-1097 were checked on the main gate of NEPZ and documents were examined. A search of vehicles in presence of an independent witness showed that 1,62,400...
Ritesh Enterprises Vs. Enforcement Directorate
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(123)ECC190; 2007(149)LC190(Delhi)
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. M/s. Ritesh Enterprises is a partnership firm. Rakesh Gondal, Rajesh Sood and Ms. Santwanter Gondal are its 3 partners. By way of the above 4 captioned petitions, the partnership firm and its 3 partners pray that the complaint filed against them by the Enforcement Directorate under Section 57 FERA and Section 49(3)(4) of FEMA pending before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi be quashed.2. It is stated in the complaint that on 28.4.1995 the Enforcement Directorate imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,50,000/- on accused persons which was recoverable from them jointly and that the penalty was not deposited. It was stated that the adjudication order dated 28.4.1995 was passed inasmuch as the accused persons had contravened provisions of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act 1973.3. As per the adjudication order it stands recorded that the accused persons have contravened Sections 18(2)(3) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act 1973.4. The adjudication ...
Ashok Kumar Vs. M.C.D.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(98)DRJ669
Hima Kohli, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner workman, praying inter alias for modification of the impugned award dated 24th July, 2004 passed by the Labour Court whereunder it was held that the termination of the petitioner workman was illegal and unjustified, the same being not in compliance with Sections 25G and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') and accordingly, compensation of Rs. 10,000 was granted to him in lieu of reinstatement, back wages and all other legal benefits.2. A brief narration of facts is necessary before recording the respective contentions of the parties. The facts as set up by the petitioner in his statement of claim before the Labour Court are that he was engaged as a Beldar on Muster Roll with the respondent Municipal Corporation of Delhi (for short `MCD') w.e.f. 6th February, 1995 and continued to work as such till 28th October, 1995, without any break, after which his services were ter...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Gautam Creations (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2007
Reported in: (2007)213CTR(Del)543
ORDER1. In this appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act') the Revenue is aggrieved by an order dt. 6th July, 2005 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal'), Delhi Bench 'B', New Delhi in ITA No. 730/Del/2005 relevant for the asst. yr. 2001-02.2. The assessed had claimed payment of a sum of Rs. 38.25 lakhs as commission expenses. Out of this, Rs. 32.75 lakhs was stated to have been paid to Upendra Kumar Sharma, Rs. 4 lakhs to M/s Mysty International of which Upendra Kumar Sharma was the proprietor and Rs. 1.50 lakhs to Pradeep Saraswat.3. The view of the AO that the assessed was unable to satisfactorily explain the payments made or the work done by the commission agents to whom the commission was paid, was concurred with by the CIT(A).4. The Tribunal has, in the impugned order, examined the evidence on record which included the correspondence between the parties and certain bills that were raised on the assessed for work done by the commission agents in res...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »