Delhi Court April 2007 Judgments

B.K. Prasad, S/O Shri K. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. As a common question of law on identical facts is raised, OAs are disposed of by this common order.2. Advocates of Central Agency Section, Legal Advisers in the main Secretariat and officers of the Branch Secretariat have questioned their merger with Indian Legal Service and grant of seniority, praying for setting aside the merger and preparation of fresh seniority by reckoning their erstwhile service in the respective cadres.3. A similar issue has recently been dealt with by the Principal Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 450/2006 and O.A. No. 1609/2006 on 17.4.2007, where the following observations have been made: 106. We could have issued a mandamus directing official respondents to act in accordance with statutory rule and DOPT instructions of 1986 to reckon the erstwhile service of incumbents of Law Commission and Government Advocates towards seniority but we have also a category of litigants before us as private respondents, who are incumbents of ILS. Their objection to the ...

itc Limited Vs. Mr. Sunil and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: LC2007(2)152

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The the plaintiff has filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, copyright, passing off and unfair competition, rendition of accounts of profits, delivery up, etc. against the defendants.2. The plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the trademarks JOHN PLAYERS in class 28 under TM No. 1131260 as of 5 September 2002 by TM Certificate dated 14 April 2005 and JOHN PLAYER in class 3 under TM No. 1151456 as of 18 November 2002 by TM certificate dated 24 March 2005 under the Trademarks Act, 1999. It is stated that Section 28(1) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 gives the registered proprietor of the trademark the exclusive right to use of the trade mark in relation to the goods or services in respect of which the trade mark is registered and to obtain relief in respect of infringement of the trade mark. The plaintiff claims to have the exclusive right to use its trademark and use by any other person of the said mark or any other mark d...

Sonu @ Kane Vs. the State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 138(2007)DLT0; 2007(96)DRJ509; [2007]292ITR0(Delhi)

Reva Khetrapal, J.1. The petitioner who is in judicial custody since 19th August, 2006 seeks bail. The facts as alleged by the prosecution are that on the said day, Head Constable Majkush, while on patrolling duty in 17 Block, Kalyanpuri, received secret information that a young man would be coming from the side of L.B.S. Hospital and would be going to Block No. 13, Kalyanpuri via Jalebi Chowk, who may be carrying some ganja. Allegedly, this information was transmitted by the Head Constable to the Duty Officer, Police Station Kalyanpuri where it was recorded as DD No. 46B. Allegedly also, the Head Constable requested seven or eight passers-by to join the raiding party, but they did not agree and left the place without disclosing their names and addresses. Accordingly, the Head Constable formed a raiding party and cordoned the area. At about 1.35 p.m., on the pointing out of the secret informer, the petitioner was apprehended and on interrogation, he disclosed his name as Sonu @ Kane. A...

Prabandhkarini Committee Shri Vs. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. The assessee has preferred this appeal against the order dated 31-10-2006 of the Commissioner, Hisar passed under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 granting registration to the assessee committee with effect from 1-4-2006 whereas the case of the assessee is that it should have been granted registration with effect from 1-4-1993 under Section 12A(a) read with Section 12AA(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee committee was established on 18-4-1992 and was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1968 vide certificate dated 20-11-1992.3. It is the case of the assessee that an application under Section 12A(a) of the Act was filed before Commissioner, Rohtak on 31-3-1993 which was received in the office of Commissioner, Rohtak on 6-4-1993.Notice for hearing was received from the Income Tax Officer, Hisar on 18-3-1999 and 20-5-1999 making enquiries about the claim for registration. These notices were duly complied vide l...

Delhi Securities Printers Vs. Dy. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(Appeals) dated 13-2-2006 for the assessment year 2003-04, in the matter of order passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein following grounds of appeal have been raised : 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) as also the assessing officer erred in making an addition of Rs. 4,65,430 on account of job work receipts by disturbing the gross profit ratio on the basis of non-maintenance of stock register, hence the addition made should be deleted. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in reducing the disallowance to Rs. 14,000 from Rs. 30,000. Hence the balance disallowance should be deleted. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (Appeals) as also the assessing officer erred in making an addition of Rs. 1,06,369 on account of car & conveyance expenses on the basis ...

Asstt. Cit Vs. Woodword Governors India (P) Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of CIT (Appeals) dated 24-9 2004 for the assessment year 2001-02, in the matter of order passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 wherein following grounds of appeal have been raised: 1. CIT (Appeals) erred in deleting the disallowance by wrongly interpreting the provisions of Section 80-IB and allowed deduction more than statutorily mandated. 2. Assessing officer allowed deduction on profits and gains "derived" from business and not on incidental activities attributable to the said business. 3. For the reasons given above it is prayed that order of the CIT (Appeals) should be set aside and the order of the assessing officer on the point of Section 80-IB be restored.2. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. Brief facts in this case are that the assessee-company is in the business of manufacturing and trading of specialized governors and controls to be used in diesel engine power generating sets a...

Ex. Hav. Jagdamba Prasad Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 140(2007)DLT0

S.N. Aggarwal, J.1. Ex-Hav. Jagdamba Prasad, a Combatant in the Indian Army was posted to No. 7, Delhi Bn NCC, B-6 Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi on 20.11.1997 and he remained posted there till 28.6.2000. On 20.11.1997, he was permitted by Station Headquarters, Delhi Cantt. (an office under respondent No. 2) to live with his family at the duty station i.e Delhi under his own arrangement and claim compensation in lieu of quarter (in short CILQ). Pursuant to the said sanction granted to him, he hired a private accommodation at Delhi and resided therein with his family i.e wife and two children out of total four children from 1.5.1998 to 30.6.2000. The petitioner was allowed reimbursement @ Rs.2100/- per month on account of CILQ vide sanction granted by the Station Headquarter, Delhi on 19.8.1998. Pursuant thereto he was paid CILQ @ Rs.2100/-per month from 1.5.1998 to 30.6.2000. The petitioner retired from the Army service while he was posted in 7 Delhi Bn NCC on 31.7.2000. At the time of ...

Darshna Devi and anr. Vs. D.D.A.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 142(2007)DLT474

S. Muralidhar, J.1. The wife of late Shri Nand Kishore, Smt. Darshna Devi and their minor daughter Ekta have filed this petition seeking a direction to the respondent Delhi Development Authority ('DDA') to allot to the petitioners accommodation a Category A under the Gadgil Assurance Scheme whereby persons like the late Shri Nand Kishore, who were displaced from Pakistan and migrated to India in 1947 were to be allotted plots2. It is stated by the petitioners that Shri Nand Kishore was a refugee displaced person from Pakistan and who migrated to India at the time of partition of the country in 1947. He settled in Delhi since 1948 and was initially permitted to reside at T-5361, Block-8A, measuring 90 sq. yards in Western Extension Area (WEA) Karol Bagh. He was also issued a ration card showing the said address. 3. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 41 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1956 read with Rule 38 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Reh...

Shalendra Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 142(2007)DLT587

T.S. Thakur, J.1. In this petition for a writ of certiorari, the petitioner calls in question the summary court martial proceedings held against the petitioner culminating in his discharge from service and for a mandamus directing the respondents to reinstate him in service with all consequential benefits. The challenge arises in the following circumstances.2. The petitioner is a Gunner Lans Naik and was posted in 74, MediumRegiment. On 26th May 2001 he is alleged to have used criminal force and slapped Subedar(Regimental Gunner Surveyor) Lok Nath Sharma on the face. A court of inquiry was ordered by the Commanding Officer into the incident which,on the basis of evidence recorded by it, came to the conclusion that the petitioner had assaulted Subedar Lok Nath Sharma and recommended disciplinary action against him. Summary of evidence was, thereafter, recorded in which the statements of as many as 5 witnesses were recorded. The petitioner, however,refused to sign the summary of evidence...

Food Corporation of India Vs. Garg Rice Mills

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 140(2007)DLT361

Gita Mittal, J.1. By this judgment, I propose to dispose of the present appeal which has been filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 by the Food Corporation of India assailing the arbitral award dated 31st January, 2002. Inasmuch as there is no dispute to the factual matrix, the same is briefly noticed hereinafter.2. The respondent M/s. Garg Rice Mill is running a business of custom milling of paddy. During the year 1995, the appellant had decided that paddy from Punjab would be offered for the milling-cum-storage to rice millers. For this purpose, it had convened a meeting at the Regional Office of the appellant at Chandigarh on 13th January, 1995, for the purposes of explaining the terms and conditions for the milling-cum-storage of the paddy. The terms and conditions on which the paddy would be given for milling-cum-storage to the millers were put before the rice millers in this meeting.3. The respondent No. 1 purportedly made an offer dated 2nd February,...