Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-06-1990
Reported in : AIR1991Delhi25; [1991]70CompCas388(Delhi); 41(1990)DLT633
..... contract between the parties. learned counsel relied on halsbury, volume 25, fourth edition, para 398, at page 221, section 46vb of the insurance act read with rule 58 of the insurance rules and life insurance corporation of india v. raja vasireddy komalavalli kmba : [1984]3scr350 in support of his contention. 38. the supreme court in general ..... specifically used the expression 'underwriting and revivals' of policies in the case of the life insurance corporation and stated that it was the divisional manager who was competent to underwrite a policy for rs.50,000 and above. the mere receipt and retention of premium until after the death of the applicant or the mere preparation of the policy document is not acceptance. acceptance must be signified by some act or acts agreed to by the parties or from which the law raises a presumption ..... 7,40,606.65 together with costs and interest has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant - national insurance co. ltd. the plaintiff is a company incorporated under the companies act, 1956, having its registered office at e-5, hauz khas, new delhi. the plaint has been ..... or the circumstances must be such as to admit of a reasonable inference. 43. in the present case, admittedly, the factory of the plaintiff was insured by the bank only till december 29, 1981, for a period between 1978 and december 29, 1981. from december 30, 1981, till june 1, 1982, the factory was not insured. it is admitted by the plaintiff that no policy was issued by the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on : Jun-13-1990
Reported in : (1990)34ITD27a(Delhi)
1. These are two appeals by the assessee arising out of his assessments to wealth-tax for the asst. years 1979-80 and 1980-81 and the grounds that are identical in both the years are as under : 1. That the CWT(A) has erred in upholding the assessed value of residential properety at F- 1/3 Hauz Khas Enclave, New Delhi at Rs. 2,89,112 after wrongly taking the Act of self-occupied portion at the rent received for the let out portion as against the ALV on the basis of rateable value assessed by the Municipal Corporation or the standard rent since rent capitalisation method has been adopted by the IAC(A). 2. That the CWT(A) has erred in upholding disallowance of liabilities and loans of the assessee at Rs. 66,321 and in view of the fact that all loans and liabilities are old one's and have been utilised in assets taxable to wealth-tax a position accepted by the department in the past, the CWT(A) has wrongly upheld this disallowance which kindly be deleted. 1. That the CWT(A) has erred in u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-09-1990
Reported in : AIR1991Delhi59; 41(1990)DLT96
Charanjit Talwar, J.(1) The petitioner Shri Ghanshyam Singh was nominated as a Director on the Board of Directors of Indian Farmers Fertilizer Cooperative Limited (for short 'IFFCO') by the Government ofIndia by a letter of 30/03/1988. The nomination was made under Bye-law No. 33 of IFFCO. It was to take effect from 31/03/1988 when theBoard was to be re-constituted. The nomination was not for affixed Period but 'valid until further orders'. In partial modification of the letter dated 30/03/1988, the Government of India by letter dated the 1 9/12/1989 nominated Shri Satbir Singh Kadiyan, Member, Legislative Assembly of the State of Haryana (respondent No. 3 herein) on the said Board of Directors in place of the petitioner herein. The letter was to take effect immediately and the nomination as in the case of Shri Ghanshyam Singh, was 'until further orders'. That letter is Annexure. 4 to the writ petition. The said respondent assumed office as Director of 1FFCO w.e.f. 20/12/1989 vice the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-01-1990
Reported in : ILR1991Delhi97
ORDERB. N. Kirpal, J.1. The challenge in this bunch of writ petitions, which are being decided by this common judgment, is to the resolution of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi whereby it approved the proposal of the Delhi Electricity Supply Committee to enhance minimum consumption guarantee charges from Rs. 40/ - per KVA to Rs. 340/ -per KVA in respect of Arc/Induction furnaces.2. The petitioners have set up/installed furnaces for the manufacture of castings and have their factories in Delhi. These furnaces have been set up after having obtained valid licenses from the respondent-Corporation for the manufacture of castings.3. One of the important raw-materials for the petitioners is electricity. Each of the petitioner has obtained electricity from the respondents and the sanctioned load is more than 100 KWS. The exact sanctioned load varies, depending upon the size and capacity of the furnaces set up by the different petitioners, but each one of them has a sanctioned load of more th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-31-1990
Reported in : AIR1990Delhi249; 42(1990)DLT121
B.N. Kirpal, J. (1) The challenge in this bunch of writ petitions, .which are being decided by this common judgment, is to the 'resolution of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi whereby it approved the proposal of the Delhi Electric supply Committee to enhance minimum consumption guarantee charges from Rs. 40 per Kva to Rs. 340 per Kva in respect of Arc/induction furnaces.(2) The petitioners have set up/installed furnaces for the manufacture of castings and have their factories m Delhi. These furnaces have been set up after having obtained valid licenses from the respondent-Corporation for the manufacture of castings.(3) One of the important raw-materials for the petitioners is electricity. Each of the petitioner has obtained electricity from the respondents and the sanctioned load is more than 100 KWS. The exact sanctioned load varies, depending upon the size and capacity of the furnaces set up by the different petitionters, but each one of them has a sanctioned load of more than 100 K...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-18-1990
Reported in : II(1992)ACC145; 1993ACJ206; 47(1992)DLT70; 1990RLR510
M.L. Varma, J.(1) This is a regular First Appeal against the orderdated 20.5.75 of the. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) on an application under Section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). This application had been made by the appellants herein claiming compensation of Rs.2,00,000.00in all on account of the death of one Shri S. Krishnan. It was registered as suitNo. 234/70. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 37,950.00only as compensation. The Tribunal also ordered payment of interest at the rate of 6% perineum from the date of the award till the date of realisation.(2) In this appeal filed on 18.10.75 the award has been challenged on various grounds by the appellants. It is worth-noting that in ground No. 5 of the Grounds of Appeal the appellants took the stand that the compensation payable to them comes to more than Rs. 2,50,000.00 and have claimed that thereforee the Tribunal ought to have awarded t...
Tag this Judgment!