Delhi Court March 2009 Judgments

Lecoanet Hemant India Private Limited Vs. Interglobe Aviation Limited

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2009]152CompCas495(Delhi)

Vipin Sanghi, J.1. This company petition under Sections 433(e), (f) and 434(1)(b) of the Companies Act 1956 (the Act) has been filed by the petitioner company to seek orders for winding up of the respondent company, namely, InterGlobe Aviation Limited.2. The petitioner is a private limited company. The present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner through one Sh. C.D. Kingsly, appointed as the authorized representative of the petitioner company the board resolution dated 09.01.2007. It is stated that Mr. Hemant Sagar and Mr. Lecoanet, the promoters of the Petitioner company are world renowned for their innovative, exquisite and exclusive garment designs since the year 1984. They have been known to produce the ready to wear line of garments every season under the name 'Lecoanet Hemant'. 3. The respondent is a company incorporated under the Act having its registered office at Delhi. The authorized share capital of the respondent company is 155,00,00,000. The paid up capital...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hi Lux Automotive (P.) Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2009]183TAXMAN260(Delhi)

ORDER1. We are concerned in this Appeal with the assessment year 1996-97. The respondent herein (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') had filed the income-tax return for the aforesaid assessment year on 30-11-1996 declaring his income of Rs. 3,21,840. The assessee is the manufacturer of tractor lights. In the said return, he had claimed deduction of expenditure made from various parties on account of purchases of raw material.2. The Income-tax Officer passed the assessment order dated 26-3-1999, disallowing the expenditure to the extent of Rs. 26,73,663 in respect of ten parties, from whom the assessee had allegedly purchased the material.. As per the Assessing Officer, the assessee had not produced the requisite documents establishing the purchase of raw material from the said ten parties.3. The assessee filed appeal there against. The CIT(A) allowed the appeal vide his order dated 19-1-2001 and remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. He, inter a...

Budh Singh Vs. Jan Vihar Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. and Another.

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President (Oral): 1. Vide order dated 11.12.2008 the complaint of the appellant was dismissed by District Forum merely on the premise that the appellant himself was a member of the Society therefore he cannot have any grievance against the Society. 2. Whether the member of any Group Housing Society is a consumer of the Society, this question has already been answered by National Commission in case M/s. Kalwati v. United Thrift and Credit Society, Petition No. 8336 of 2001 and also the Supreme Court and Consumer Law Cases 1886 of 2005 wherein similar plea was taken and it was held that remedy under Section 3 of Consumer Protection Act is in addition to and not in derogation of any other law for the time being in force and therefore if any member has any grievance against the society he has right to file complaint under Consumer Protection Act for compensation for mental agony, harassment and deficiency in service. 3. It is not the case that all the members say more than 100...

Post Master, Rajinder Nagar Post Office Vs. Ashok Kriplani.

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President (Oral): 1. For having not delivered the registered letter and opened it and then returning in torn condition, the appellant has been vide impugned order dated 12.9.2007 held guilty for deficiency in service and directed to pay Rs. 2,000 as compensation and Rs. 1,000 as cost of litigation. Feeling aggrieved the appellant has preferred this appeal. 2. The allegations of the respondent leading to the impugned order in brief were that he sent a letter by courier M/s. Super Speed, Kota at No. 3730 dated 24.7.2003 to a addressee of Kota but that was torn open on the back (rear) side by the same and after reading the contents was returned back to the courier. On hard pressing the courier, the delivery boy has given his comments so on the ill-fated envelope itself. On 12.12.2004, the respondent again on behalf of his wife sent two registered letters at Nos. 3572 and 3673 from Karol Bagh Post Office, New Delhi to the addressee of Kota but both were received back torn open...

State Vs. Mahavir

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2009CriLJ3313

Mool Chand Garg, J.1. This appeal which has been filed under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. by the appellant assailing the order passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge dated 27.01.1997 whereby the Addl. Sessions Judge has reversed the order of conviction and sentence awarded to the respondents for having committed an offence under Section 16(1)(1A) and Section 7 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as PFA Act).2. Briefly stating the facts of this case are as follows:i) On 20.04.1989 F.I. Arun Kumar purchased a sample of Lal Mirchi powder from Shri Mahavir respondent at his Masala Rehri at Jawahar Chowk, Najafgarh, Delhi which had been stored for sale by the respondents. The sample was taken from an open tray bearing no label declaration but it is the case of the prosecution that the sample was taken after properly homogenizing the same with the help of a clean and dry jhaba lying there.ii) That the sample so taken was divided into 3 equal parts and each part of the sampl...

Union of India (Uoi) Represented by Secretary to Government Ministry o ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 158(2009)DLT48

Madan B. Lokur, J.1. The Petitioner (Union of India) is aggrieved by an order dated 31st July, 2008 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench in OA No. 1024/2008, OA No. 1036/2008 and OA No. 1037/2008.2. The Respondents are an advocate (Shri B. Krishna Mohan) and two Chartered Accountants (Shri Inturi Rama Rao and Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia). They all belong to the general or unreserved category and have been held entitled to appointment as a Judicial Member and Administrative Members respectively in the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short the ITAT).3. On 22nd January, 2005 the Union of India issued an advertisement for filling up 22 vacancies of members in the ITAT. Of these vacancies, three were for Judicial Member (JM) in the unreserved category (UR) and five were for Accountant Members (AM) also in the unreserved category (UR). The advertisement specifically stated that the number of vacancies is approximate and is liable to increase or decrease due to unexpe...

The Mgt. Hindu Educational Society Shri Kurukeshetra (Regd.) and anr. ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 158(2009)DLT212

Sanjiv Khanna, J.1. The Management Hindu Educational Society Shri Kurukeshetra, the appellant is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act and is managing and running a co-educational school. 2. Ms. Prabha Tyagi, respondent No. 3 herein in 1994 was appointed as a teacher in the said school. Respondent No. 3's services were terminated on 15th October, 1997. 3. Aggrieved, respondent No. 3 filed a petition before the Delhi School Education Tribunal. Relying upon Rule 105 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules, for short), Ld. Tribunal held that the appellant herein had wrongly terminated the services of the respondent No. 3 without prior approval of the Director as stipulated in the said Rule. The Tribunal also held that the appointment of respondent No. 3 was not ad hoc/temporary. It was observed that at best the appointment was on probation and even if the appointment was on probation, prior approval under Rule 105(1) of the Direc...

Harbans Lal and ors. Vs. Registrar of Companies

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2009]151CompCas507(Delhi); [2009]91SCL411(Delhi)

S. Muralidhar, J.1. The prayer in this petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC) is for quashing of Company Case No. 122/2005 titled 'Registrar of Companies v. Rishi Electronic Limited and Ors.' under Sections 234(4)(a) read with 234(3A) of the Companies Act, 1956(`Act') pending in the court of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM), New Delhi. 2. The aforementioned criminal complaint, filed in 2005 stated that Rishi Electronics Limited (REL) is a public limited company registered with the Registrar of Companies (ROC). The last Annual Return of REL was filed on 29.9.2001. While REL has been made accused No. 1 in the criminal complaint, accused No. 2 to 4 are Harbans Lal, Ravinder Kumar Rishi and Smt. Nirmala Rishi respectively. It is stated in the aforementioned criminal complaint that the said accused No. 2 to 4 are directors/officers of REL in terms of the Annual Return dated 29.9.2001 and the latest Form 32. The ROC received a complaint dated...

Shri Satpal Vs. Delhi Jal Board

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 158(2009)DLT680

V. K. Shali, J.1. This is a writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the orderdated 20th June, 2006 passed by Sh.Prakash Chander, Asstt. Commissioner (General) Delhi Jal Board by virtue of which his application was rejected by the respondent, for being appointed on compassionate ground because of the fact that the widow of the deceased Dalip Singh, an employee of the respondent had received a payment of Rs. 3,78,000/- on account of pensionary benefits. It was observed that the said sum was sufficient in the view of the department, for meeting the requirement of the family. This view was formed by the Screening Committee which considered the application for compassionate appointment. In addition to this, it was also observed in the impugned order that there are more deserving cases to be appointed in the 5% quota of posts which are allocated/earmarked for being appointed on compassionate ground.2. Briefly stated the facts of the present case are that the petitioner had actually...

Rajesh Wire Industries Vs. Shri Umesh and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 158(2009)DLT472; [2009(121)FLR1131]; (2009)IVLLJ715Del

V.K. Shali, J. 1. This is a writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the ex parte award dated 30th September, 2003 passed by the learned Labour Court-III, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in ID No. 257/1999 in case titled as The Management of Rajesh Wire Industries v. Its Workmen C/o Rashtriya Udyog Mazdoor Union.2. By virtue of the aforesaid ex parte award, the learned Labour Court had held the termination of the services respondents/workmen with effect from 5th July, 1996 as illegal and unjustified and accordingly directed their reinstatement on the post of 'Helper' with full back wages @ Rs. 1,677/- per month or at such rate as has been fixed by the appropriate Government from time to time whichever is higher till the date of reinstatement.3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that it is not in dispute that Sh.Umesh and Sh.Chattar Ram were working with the petitioner /Management as workmen. Both these workers alleged that their services were illegally and unjustifiably termi...