Delhi Court October 1993 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.
Veena Kohli Vs. Family Planning Association of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-08-1993
Reported in: 1993IVAD(Delhi)552; 52(1993)DLT581
Arun B. Saharya, J. (1) This revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. is directed against an order dated 1st of February 1992, passed by the Trial Court, dismissing an application of the petitioner claiming payment of salary for the period of two years, after attaming the age of 58 years, when she continued to work under orders of the Court, during pendency of her suit for declaration that she was entitled to remain in service till she attained the age of 60 years.(2) The petitioner Veena Kohli was employed by the first respondent,the Family Planning Association of India (FPAI). Fpai is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act for promoting the family planning programme as a Field Worker. Fpai is funded by grants-in-aid by the second respondent Delhi Administration.(3) A dispute arose about the age of superannuation of employees like the petitioner working in the FPAI. The employees claimed that they were entitled to work up to the age ...
Mohammed Inam Qadir Matiur Rehman MatIn and anr. Vs. Jamia Millia Isla ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-08-1993
Reported in: 1993IVAD(Delhi)367; 1994(28)DRJ91
D.P. Wadhwa, J. (1) Rule D.B. Since the issue involved is very short we propose to dispose of these petitions at this stage itself.(2) The petitioners in these two petitions challenge the appointment of the sixth respondent Mr. A. Waris as Deputy Registrar of the Jamia Millia Islamia, a university constituted under the Jamia Millia Islamia Act, 1988. In both the petitions there are eight respondents. The petitioners say they were eligible to the post of Deputy Registrar but their candidature was ignored and sixth respondent selected in contravention of the rules.(3) An advertisement appeared in the daily Hindustan Times, Delhi Edition, of 9 May 1991. This was issued by the Jamia Millia Islamia (for short 'the university') inviting applications for various posts in 24 categories in the university as mentioned in the advertisement. Some of the posts were teaching posts and some administrative posts. For various posts certain essential qualifications and desirable qualifications were ment...
Jagdish Singh Vs. Shyam Lal Charitable Trust
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-08-1993
Reported in: 53(1994)DLT190
Jaspal Singh, J.(1) Under Clause (i) of Sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, eviction of a tenant can be sought if the premises were let to him for use as a residence by reason of his being in the service or employment of the landlord, and he has ceased to be in such service or employment. Taking advantage of this provision the Shyam Lal Charitable Trust sought the eviction of the present petitioner. It was claimed that he was allotted the premises in dispute on account of his being in the service or employment of the Trust and he had become liable to be evicted on account of his having ceased to be in such service or employment. The eviction petition was dismissed by the Additional Rent Controller but in appeal the Tribunal held the ground of eviction as proved and consequently allowed the appeal and passed an order of eviction under the said provision. Aggrieved by the said order the tenant has filed this petition. (2) As per the learned Counsel for the petiti...
Heera Lal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-08-1993
Reported in: 1994(3)Crimes10; 52(1993)DLT231
Anil Dev Singh, J. (1) This is an appeal directed against the judgment and order of learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 6/03/1990,whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 20 of the NDPS4 Act and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lakh.(2) The prosecution case is that PW-9S.1. Inder Singh, on August I, received a secret information that two persons present near Sujan Singh Park were having charas in their possession. Upon receipt of theinformation, a raiding party was constituted under the supervision of SHO Tughlaq Road. Besides the Sho, the raiding party consisted of S.I. RamKumar PW-5, S.I. Inder Singh PW-9 and Constable Sat Dev PW-4. ACP Ajay Kumar PW-6 was also informed, who is alleged to have reached thespot. Along with the raiding party, a public witness PW-3 Shanker Lal, a scooter driver was also associated.(3) Around 4 p.m. of the same day viz. 1/08/1988the appellant was apprehended at Maharishi Raman Marg near Suj...
Ramesh Chand Vs. Manju Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-08-1993
Reported in: II(1994)DMC256
Jaspal Singh, J.1. On October 23, 1993, the learned Additional District Judge passed an order under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act fixing maintenance pendente lite at the rate of Rs. 350/- per month besides Rs. 1000/- towards litigation expenses. Thereafter, an application was moved for review of that order which was dismissed on 5th January, 1993. Hence this petition.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has taken me through the order of October 23, 1992 and has submitted that it has been interpolated and unauthorised additions have been made in the same. Her grievance is particularly directed against the reference in the order to a salary Certificate issued by Madan Auto Industries. It is argued that the Certificate referred to in the said order having actually been issued by Madan Auto Industries on 18th November, 1992 and the same having been filed in Court only on 19th November, 1992 its reference in the order of 23rd October, 1992 is sufficient in itself to show that it...
Jagdish Kumar Sharma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-07-1993
Reported in: 52(1993)DLT452
C.L. Chaudhry, J. (1) This appeal is directed against the award made by the Accident Claims Tribunal dated 29th August, 1979 by which the appellant was allowed compensation to the tune of Rs. 20,000.00. The appellant was involved in an accident and suffered injuries. He filed a petition u/Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicle Act claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 65.000.00. The facts as disclosed in the petition are that on 1 9/09/1968 at about 9.30 p.m. he was going in a three-wheeler scooterNo. Dlr 6238 which was being driven by the respondent Brij Lal. When three-wheeler scooter reached in the midst of the crossing at Chhata Railway Bridge from Red Fort towards Kashmere Gate main road, a DTC bus No. Dlp 334 driven by Chander Bhan, respondent which was coming from railway station side and was going towards Jamuna Bridge,dashed in just in the midst of the crossing and caused the accident thereby seriously injuring the appellant. He was immediately taken in a taxi to Irwin hospital...
Prakash Bhatia Vs. Subhash Chander Suri and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-07-1993
Reported in: 52(1993)DLT442
C.L. Chaudhry, J. (1) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal). The appellant was involved in an accident on 1st September. 1973 at about 6.00 p.m. She filed a claim compensation before the Mact claiming a compensation of Rs. 75,000.00 on the following allegations. (2) That the appellant was occupying the pillion seat of a two wheeler scooter being No. Ust 8315. It was being driven by Rakesh Singh. She was returning home and the scooter was coming from the side of the Bengali Market. When the scooter had practically crossed the crossing of Curzon Road and Hailey Road, Ashok Kumar, driving taxi bearing No. Dlt 4731 at an excessive speed, unmindful of the traffic on the road and in violation of traffic rules knocked down the scooter. The taxi driver neither slowed down the speed nor applied brakes. The scooter was being driven carefully and without any negligence whatsoever. As a result of the impa...
Kulvinder Singh Sethi Vs. Punjab and Sindh Bank
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-07-1993
Reported in: 1993(27)DRJ439
Gokal Chand Mittal, C.J. (1) According to the regulations for educational/ professional qualifications 20 marks have been provided; for performance/CR 30 marks have been provided; for written test 30 marks and for oral interview 20 marks, are provided Challenge is made to oral interview marks it on the ground that this is excessive and it should not have been more than 12.5% or 15%. Reliance is placed on the decisions of Ajay Hasia vs Khalid Mujub Sehravardi : (1981)ILLJ103SC and Ashok Kumar Yadav vs State of Haryana : AIR1987SC454 . (2) Where selection is made for promotion within the service the provision for 20% oral test is not excessive and we find support from the decision in D. V. Bakshi vs Union of India, It 1993 (4) S.C.ISO. Keeping in view the ratio of the aforesaid decision we find that 20% marks for oral test is not excessive and the regulation which fell for consideration before us is not illegal or arbitrary. (3) Even the record was produced by the respondent before us. O...
N.S. Kapur and ors. Vs. the University of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-07-1993
Reported in: 1993(27)DRJ647; ILR1995Delhi509
D.P. Wadhwa, J. (1) The petitioners, who are respectively a Reader and Lecturer in the S.G.T.B. Khalsa College (for short 'college') affiliated to the University of Delhi, have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking to have the re-employment of the fifth respondent as Principal of the college quashed. The four other respondents are respectively University of Delhi ('the University' for short);Vice-Chancellor of University of Delhi Governing Body of Sgtb Khalsa College;and Sgtb Khalsa College itself. It is stated that the re-employment of the fifth respondent as a Principal is in contravention of clause 3-A of the Ordinance Xii of the University. The University has been established under the Delhi University Act, 1922, and under section 30 is empowered to issue ordinances for various matters prescribed therein. Under these powers Ordinance Xii was issued which relates to college appointee teachers. Under clause I, unless the context otherwise requires, a teach...
Umesh Bhatia Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-07-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ1234; 1994(2)Crimes381; 1993(27)DRJ510
Anil Dev Singh, J. (1) In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the challenge is to the order of detention dated May 5,1993 passed by the Joint Secretary to the Govern- ment of India against the petitioner. The detention of the petitioner 'has been ordered under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 ( for short 'COFEPOSA ACT). (2) The facts set out in the grounds of detention are as under: On March 10,1993 the petitioner was intercepted in the security zone of the Igi Airport, New Delhi, when he was about to fly to Singapore. His baggage was recalled from the aircraft and searched. The search of the baggage resulted in seizure of the following currencies:- '1.US37850 2. Dm 12050 3. Sing. 1450 4. Can. 2050 5. Lira 49,60,000 6. Bahrin Dinar 10; 7. Oman Riyal 10 8. Yen 1000. 9. Thai Bhatt 210. 10. Spanish Pese to 5000 11. Mal 20 12. Uk Pounds 1000 and 13. Us Travellers cheques 1280'Pursuant to the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »