Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: benefit sharing Court: delhi Page 3 of about 6,378 results (0.023 seconds)

Kartar Singh and Sons (P) Ltd. Vs. Auto Tension Limited

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1997VAD(Delhi)535; 68(1997)DLT811; 1997(43)DRJ191

..... in august 1995, the first defendant wrote to the plaintiff by a letter dated 11.08.1995 that the plaintiff was taken into the partnership for sharing the benefits and those benefits have been withdrawn with effect from 01.04.1995. ..... balwant singh had 35% shares in the partnership and after the death of balwant singh the plaintiff was taken a partner for sharing the benefits of partnership as a minor to the extent of 30%. ..... the question of legitimacy of the plaintiff has been raised now for the purpose of this case and it is clearly after-thought and a perusal of the documents would show that the plaintiff would be entitled to his share in the partnership and he would be entitled to 35% shares which was held by his father balwant singh. ..... in view of the fact that the partnership is doing the business, i do not think it necessary to appoint a receiver but at once the defendants cannot deprive the plaintiff of his share in the partnership. .....

Gail (India) Limited vs.jindal Saw Limited

Court : Delhi

..... no occasion/scope for raising a demand to pass on any commercial benefit ; (xii) on 21.10.2003 eil sent letter to gail stating over-all saving of spl from not importing the mother pipes would be about 23 crores; (xiii) on 26.9.2003 spl s letter ..... from mundra mill itself; (ix) on 26.08.2003 gail agreed to spl s proposal to produce mother-pipes from mundra facility, subject to passing on commercial benefit to gail; (x) on 27.8.2003 spl sent letter acknowledging gail s reaffirmation of the production of 90 km mother pipe at mundra, however, reference to commercial benefits was not clearly comprehended; (xi) on 19.09.2003 spl wrote to gail stating, interalia, the instant contract was a fixed price contract and there was ..... 90 km plates to produce unfinished pipes at mundra pipe mill and finishing at the beveling unit of the plant against the requirement of 90 km pipes through mother pipes route, subject to passing on commercial benefits to gail, which shall accrue to you, as a result of manufacturing of pipes at mundra plant, instead of importing mother pipes form saw pipe usa inc. ..... hence the claim qua sharing commercial benefit was against the terms of the contract as ..... accepting the delivery of the product and it did not refuse its delivery by saying the commercial benefit be first passed onto them only then the petitioner shall accept the delivery. .....

Ram Phal vs.union of India and Anr

Court : Delhi

..... and permissible view is that, all persons who are interested in the land in question would be entitled to share the benefit arising on account of the redetermination award on pro rata basis as per their respective entitlement and none of the interested person whether co-owner or a tenant can be deprived of the benefit merely on the ground that he had not preferred any application under section 28(1) of the act. ..... aforesaid judgment makes it clear that it was treated as the first principles of law that a co-owner is entitled to have the benefit of the enhanced compensation given to the other co-owners qua the same land acquired which belonged to all of them, jointly. ..... made, it is irrelevant as to at whose instance the respondents/authorities are under an obligation to give benefit of the said redetermination to all the interested persons irrespective of whether they had preferred any application or not ..... in respect of market value of the land, in terms of the award passed in respect of the neighbouring land falling under the same notification under section 4, but not with regard to the share of the person who makes the application under the said provisions. ..... other non-applicant is not entitled to the benefit of the collector made on redetermination under sub- ..... of the land acquisition act, and more importantly, article 14 of the constitution of india and given the total similarity between his case and that of bhagwana, the benefit of this court s judgment too should be given to him.5. .....

Glitter Gold Plantation Ltd. and ors. Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and anr ...

Court : Delhi

..... it was stated in the brochure that the company shall give teak trees to the unit holders after 20 years and the share per unit, which at the time of offer was 2,500/-, was likely to be rs.3.00 lakh per unit at the time teak trees are given to the investors. ..... brochure issued by the company clearly shows that the schemes floated by the company were meant for mobilization of funds by way of contribution of public at large and the corpus was sought to be invested in property with a view to share the benefits arising out of deployment of such common corpus. ..... not initially defined under the statute, was generally understood to include such schemes as are floated for mobilisation of money by way of contribution from the public at large and the corpus is invested in property with a view to share the benefits arising out of deployment of such common corpus. ..... that petitioner no.1 was incorporated in 1996, and, therefore, was not carrying on business on 25.1.1995, it was held that the proviso to sub-section (1b) of section 12 of the act was not applicable to it and was not entitled to the benefit of the said proviso. .....

Deepa Jain vs.kamlesh Jain & Ors

Court : Delhi

..... ground that only on the strength of letter dated 16th june, 2014 whereby tsr darashaw wrote to ms.deepa jian that mr.kamlsesh jian and smt.sneh lata jian has directed them to release the shares and benefits held under the folio which are the subject matter of the captioned suit filed by the petitioner.10. ..... the amount of rs.1,20,000/- was calculated by computing the cost of 100 shares of telco having face value of `10/- each amounting to `43,800 plus cost of 60 bonus shares `26,280/-, dividend `600/-, stamp charges `256/-, penalty `200/- and interest `48, ..... the petitioner had right to claim the value of the shares along with the dividend and interest, at that time he could have sought recovery of shares as well or in the alternative, which was not ..... not the case of the plaintiff that the relief of claiming the 100 shares was not available to him on the date of institution of the suit ..... impugned order records that in the year 1998 the suit was filed for recovery of rs.1,20,000/- being the cost of 100 shares of telco along with the arrears of bonus and dividend etc. ..... petitionr also proposed to amend the prayer clause thereby claiming the recovery of 100 shares of telco as per description in the application under order vi rule 17 ..... has submitted that the amendment sought to be made in the plaint could not have been disallowed by the learned trial court for the reasons that necessary averments in respect of the 100 shares now sought to be recovered, have already been made in the plaint. .....

N.S. JaIn Vs. the State

Court : Delhi

Reported in : ILR1978Delhi327; 1978RLR442

..... . the state of maharashtra, : 1967crilj414 , the conspiracy was a general conspiracy to keep on issuing licenses in the names of fictitious firms and to share the benefits arising out of those licenses when no real independent person was the licensee ..... . likewise, if others involved in the crime and similarly situated have received the benefit of life imprisonment or if the offence is only constructive, being under section 302 read with section 149, or again the accused has acted suddenly under another's instigation, without premeditation, perhaps the court may humanely ..... . he has testified further that be is himself assessed to income-tax as an individual and shows his share of the income from the partnership business on estimate basis ..... . he is, thereforee, entitled to the benefit of doubt in respect of this charge also .....

SachIn Gupta Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India and anr.

Court : Delhi

..... it was stated in the brochure that the company shall give teak trees to the unit holders after 20 years and the share per unit, which at the time of offer was 2,500/-, was likely to be rs.3.00 lakh per unit at the time teak trees are given to the investors. ..... brochure issued by the company clearly shows that the schemes floated by the company were meant for mobilization of funds by way of contribution of public at large and the corpus was sought to be invested in property with a view to share the benefits arising out of deployment of such common corpus. ..... not initially defined under the statute, was generally understood to include such schemes as are floated for mobilisation of money by way of contribution from the public at large and the corpus is invested in property with a view to share the benefits arising out of deployment of such common corpus. ..... that petitioner no.1 was incorporated in 1996, and, therefore, was not carrying on business on 25.1.1995, it was held that the proviso to sub-section (1b) of section 12 of the act was not applicable to it and was not entitled to the benefit of the said proviso. .....

Yashwant JaIn Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... it was stated in the brochure that the company shall give teak trees to the unit holders after 20 years and the share per unit, which at the time of offer was 2,500/-, was likely to be rs.3.00 lakh per unit at the time teak trees are given to the investors. ..... brochure issued by the company clearly shows that the schemes floated by the company were meant for mobilization of funds by way of contribution of public at large and the corpus was sought to be invested in property with a view to share the benefits arising out of deployment of such common corpus. ..... not initially defined under the statute, was generally understood to include such schemes as are floated for mobilisation of money by way of contribution from the public at large and the corpus is invested in property with a view to share the benefits arising out of deployment of such common corpus. ..... that petitioner no.1 was incorporated in 1996, and, therefore, was not carrying on business on 25.1.1995, it was held that the proviso to sub-section (1b) of section 12 of the act was not applicable to it and was not entitled to the benefit of the said proviso. .....

Ram Kanwar Vs. Punjab National Bank

Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

..... complainant in the complaint filed before df-ii has computed the loss caused to him on account of non-allotment of rights debentures and denial of benefit of shares to be allotted in lieu of part 'a' and part 'b' of the debentures to be rs. ..... 35 per share at the end of six months and another 226 shares at the rate of rs. ..... terms of the issue further provided that the applicant complainant would have been allotted automatically 226 shares at the rate of rs. ..... 55/- per share at the ends of 15 months. .....

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Pinnacle Industries Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in : (2006)(104)ECC499

..... they entered into an agreement with m/s.saporiti, italy (a foreign company) on 23.11.1998 for availing the benefit of technical know-how for manufacture of furniture and also sale thereof in india. ..... it is rather a fee between the two contracting parties to be paid for sharing mutual benefits/profits. ..... the learned consultant to the respondents argues that royalty is only a share of profit and to support his contention he relies upon the tribunal's decision in navinon ltd. ..... it was held here that royalty represents sharing of profit reserved by owner for permitting another person to use his property. ..... it is understood as a share of product or profit reserved by owner for permitting another the use of his property. .....