Delhi Court November 2009 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.
V.S. Gupta Vs. Punjab National Bank
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2009
Reported in: [2010]154CompCas1(Delhi)
V.K. Jain, J.1. This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing criminal complaints No. 1367/2008 and 1368/2008, filed by the respondent against the petitioner and others under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. Identical allegations have been made in both the complaints, the only difference being the date and amount of the cheques.2. Complaints under Section 138 and 141 of Negotiable Instrument Act read with Section 420 of IPC were filed by respondent - Punjab National Bank against Padmini Technologies Ltd. and 30 others including the petitioner - V.S. Gupta. It was alleged in the complaint that accused No. 2 to 4 namely Shri Vivek Nagpal, Managing Director, Shri Mahesh Malhotra, Commercial Manager, Shri V.S. Gupta, Director of accused No. 1 - Padmini Technologies Ltd., were carrying on the management and day to day affairs of Company and were responsible for everything related to finances of the company. It has been further alleged tha...
P.P.A. Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mangal SaIn Mittal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2009
Reported in: 166(2010)DLT84
Vikramajit Sen, J.1. This Appeal assails the Order dated 18.9.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge passing a Decree for possession predicated on the Plaintiff's Application, IA No. 3384/2008 filed under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC'. for short). The learned Single Judge has concluded 'that the written statement contains unambiguous admissions about the lawful tenancy of the defendant having expired on 31-12-2004; there has been no extension of the lease arrangement, which ended by efflux of time, and the plaintiff sent notices asking the defendant to vacate the premises. The plaintiff is, in this Court's view, clearly entitled to the decree of possession he seeks, through the present application. In view of these findings, the relief sought in the other application is rendered infructuous; the plaintiff would have to prove his entitlement to damages; and the amount he seeks as a decree, for the purpose'.2. The learned Single Judge has rejected the Appl...
Jagjit Pal Singh Anand Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2009
Reported in: (2010)229CTR(Del)243; [2010]321ITR106(Delhi)
A.K. Sikri, J.1. The appellant before us is an individual who has been regularly assessed to the income tax for last number of years. His source of income is the salary, rent and share income from registered firm M/s General Automobiles.2. In the present appeal we are concerned with the assessment year 1993-94. The appellant had filed his return of income for this year on 13th March, 1995 declaring total income of Rs. 27,054/-. This assessment was reopened by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act on 30th May, 2001. The reason given for re-assessment was the adjudication order passed by the Collector of Customs on 11th January, 1994 and information of the said adjudication having received by the Assessing Officer from the Collector of Customs.3. It so happened that certain goods namely consignment of Ball Bearings consigned to one M/s V.A. Enterprises were intercepted at cargo on 4th March, 1993 and were placed under seizure under Section 110 of the Customs Act. Said co...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Advance Detergents Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-30-2009
Reported in: (2010)228CTR(Del)356; [2010]188TAXMAN15(Delhi)
A.K. Sikri, J.IT Appeal No. 248 of 20091. This appeal was admitted and heard on the following substantial question of law:Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the interest earned by the assessee on late payment received from the customers is eligible for deduction under Section 80-IA of the IT Act, 1961 ?2. This question has arisen for consideration under the following circumstances:3. The assessee is an industrial undertaking. For the asst. yr. 1997-98, it filed its return declaring income as 'nil'. During the assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that the assessee had shown a sum of Rs. 12,60,540 under the head 'Miscellaneous receipts' and had taken that amount into consideration while computing deductions under Section 80-IA of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). On being questioned, the explanation of the assessee was that this amount represented interest on late payment charges by the purchaser of the goods, to whom the goods had been expor...
Lotika Sarkar Vs. Preeti Dhoundial and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-26-2009
Reported in: 167(2010)DLT1
Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. This suit was filed by the plaintiff aged about 86 years with a prayer of cancellation of gift deed dated 28th June, 2007 whereby the property No. L-1/10, Hauz Khas Enclave, New Delhi was gifted by the plaintiff to defendant No. 1. A prayer is also made that the defendants be directed to handover the peaceful and vacant possession of the suit property to the plaintiff and they further be directed to render accounts in respect of her funds and financial dealings.2. In the ground for cancellation, it was stated by the plaintiff that the plaintiff and her husband had no children and defendant No. 2, husband of defendant No. 1, was a serving officer in Indian Police Service and his son, that is, defendant No. 3 had to pursue his education in Delhi and he wanted defendant No. 3 to reside with the plaintiff and her husband. Since the plaintiff and her husband were at advanced stage of their lives, the plaintiff was persuaded by her husband to agree to this proposal...
Voltas Ltd. Vs. the Federal Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-26-2009
Reported in: (2010)157PLR27
Hima Kohli, J.1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant (defendant No. 6 in the court below) against a judgment and decree dated 16.11.1996 passed in a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 41,219.75 paise filed by the respondent No. 1/Bank (plaintiff in the court below), against the appellant and the respondents No. 2 to 6 (defendants No. 1 to 6 in the court below).2. Before proceeding to deal with the respective submissions of the parties, it is necessary to advert to the brief facts of the case. Respondent No. 1/Bank, plaintiff in the suit proceedings, claimed that on 06.07.1981, it had engaged the services of the respondent No. 2 firm as its sub-contractor for completing certain jobs in connection with a contract awarded to it by the West Bengal Electricity Board for erection, testing and commissioning of six numbers of Electrostatic Precipitators for their Kolhaghat Thermal Power Station. As per the averments in the plaint, respondent No. 3, the sole proprietor of respondent No....
Lt Foods Ltd. Vs. Sachdeva and Sons Rice Mills Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-23-2009
Reported in: (2010)157PLR32
ORDERShiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. This application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC preferred by defendants seeking leave to amend the written statement reveals the casual and callous manner in which advocate of defendants acted while filing WS and the casual manner in which defendants themselves acted while filing WS and also shows fall in professional standards.2. The amendment of the written statement is sought on the ground that while filing written statement in this suit, preliminary objections raised about the maintainability of the suit were prepared by 'cut-copy-paste' from preliminary objections raised in another suit being CS(OS) No. 612 of 2009. The preliminary objections raised by defendants are now required to be amended because they were not related to the present suit and were not in conformity with the defence raised by defendant No. 1. Thus, defendants seek leave to amend the written statement so as to change the preliminary objections No. 1,2, 5,7,9,10 and 11. On similar groun...
Kailash Chand Vs. the State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-2009
Reported in: 166(2010)DLT129
V.K. Jain, J.1. This is a petition Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing FIR No. 817/2009 registered at police station Sultan Puri Under Section 304A of Indian Penal Code. It has been stated in the petition that the matter has been compromised between the petitioner and respondent No. 2 and it has been agreed that the petitioner would pay a sum of Rs. 3.5 lakhs to respondent No. 2 against all her claims. Out of that amount, a sum of Rs. 2.5 lakhs has already been paid to respondent No. 2 and the remaining amount is to be paid after quashing of FIR.2. The FIR in this case was lodged by one Purshotam, alleging therein that deceased Rajnish was working in a factory situated at C-15, Sharma Colony, Budh Vihar where clutch-brakes and allied products are manufactured with a machine run on electricity. The machine was not repaired despite several complaints. In the intervening night of 28th / 29th May, 2005, current flow from the machine hurt his brother, deceased R...
B.L. Bhartiya Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-18-2009
Reported in: 166(2010)DLT174
ORDERV.K. Jain, J.1. No one has appeared for Respondent No. 2 even on third call. It is already 2.15 pm. No one was present for the respondent No. 2 on the last two dates of hearing. Heard.This a petition for quashing the order dated 5.10.06 whereby the petitioner was summoned for the offence punishable under Sections 416, 417, 418, 419 and 420 of IPC. In nutshell, the case of the complainant Dr. Om Prakash Maurya, as disclosed in the complaint, is that one Ram Pal Singh (accused No. 3 in the complaint) proposed marriage of his son Ashutosh Kumar with one Aparna, daughter of Mrs. Shakuntala Jayant (accused No. 1 in the complaint), and the girl was shown to him in the house of the father of Smt. Shakuntala Jayant. The marriage of Aparna with Ashutosh Kumar was solemnized on 6th November, 2003. After marriage it was discovered that in fact Aparna was a patient of Schizophrenia. This came to be revealed only when Aparna was taken to Dr. Bhargava's Clinic in Munirka on 27.12.2003 and there...
Kasturi Lal Vs. the Life Insurance Corpn. of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-13-2009
Reported in: 164(2009)DLT475
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 23.3.1999 dismissing WP(C) No. 3607/1990 filed by the appellant against Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC).2. The prayers made in the writ petition are as under:(i) to direct the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for the purposes of promotion to the post of Higher Grade Assistant (Artist) and promote him to the same post retrospectively from the date when he become eligible to be considered for promotion with all consequential benefits as in 1975- 1976;(ii) to declare the illegal action of the respondents in deleting the category of the Higher Grade Assistant (Artist) from the New Rules of 1987 as totally arbitrary, illegal and discriminatory and violative of the fundamental rights of the petitioner as enshrined in the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India; and(iii) grant any other relief, order/direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the circumstance of the case...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »