Delhi Court May 1995 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1995 Page 14 of about 141 results (0.010 seconds)Reoti Saran Sharma Vs. Numero Uno Internation and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IIIAD(Delhi)29; 1995(2)ARBLR87(Delhi); 60(1995)DLT834; 1995(35)DRJ382
N.G. Nandi, J. (1) The plaintiff seeks relief of ad interim injunction pending hearing and disposal of the suit under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 Civil Procedure Code on the averments in the plaint that the plaintiff has been writing plays, dialogues, story lines and is a member of National Juries for Film & Radio Awards; that defendant No.1 is a sole proprietory concern of defendant No.2 who is a well known film actor, producer and director in the film industry; that defendant No.2 earlier produced and directed T.V. Seriall 'THE Sword Of Tipu SULTAN'. Thereafter, defendant No.2 embarked upon the idea of producing another Tv Seriall with the banner 'THE Great MARATHA'; that on this occasion, defendant No.2 invited the plaintiff to his office at Bombay for discussion; that the plaintiff entered into an agreement with defendants 1 & 2 on 1.10.1993, which is reproduced in the plaint; that according to the contract, the plaintiff started rendering his services of writing dialogues on the basis of ...
Tag this Judgment!Vasudeva Publicity Service Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IIIAD(Delhi)292; 59(1995)DLT227; 1995(33)DRJ589; 1995RLR444
Jaspal Singh, J. (1) The dispute revolves mainly around the effect of Bye-laws made by the New Delhi Municipal Committee relating to pasting of Bills and Advertisements framed under section 188(n) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. However, let me first bring forth the factual canvass. (2) The plaintiff firm is engaged in the business of outdoor publicity/advertisement, inter alia, by way of display of hoardings etc. in Delhi and other places. It says that it applied by registered post to the New Delhi Municipal Committee for grant of permission to its advertisement hoardings at two places, one within the premises of the National Stadium at the India Gate round-about and the second on the land allegedly belonging to the Northern Railways at Safdarjung Fly over and as the New Delhi Municipal Committee failed to intimate its decision in writing to the applicant within sixty days of receipt of the application, the same was deemed to have been sanctioned as per Bye law 3 of the Bye-laws an...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Richhpal Gupta Vs. Dcm Shriram Consolidated Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 59(1995)DLT284; 1995RLR395
Vijender Jain, J. (1) This revision petition is directed against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge remanding the complaint to the Metropolitan Magistrate. Mr. Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, has argued that Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short 'Act') is attracted only when the amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid pursuant to some agreement with the Bank. In no other contingency according to Mr. Gupta, a complaint under Section 138 of the Act can be filed. He, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, has argued that the cheque when returned on account of stop payment, the provisions of Section 138 of the Act will not beapplicable. In support of his contentions, he has cited a .judgment of Kerala High Court in Bhageerathy v. eena Ii (1992) B C 520, a judgment of Madras High Court in Mrs. R. Jayalkshmi v. Mrs. Rashida I (1992) B C 259 ...
Tag this Judgment!Narinder Kumar Vs. Harnam Singh
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 58(1995)DLT781; 1995RLR359
M.K. Sharma, J. (1) This appeal by the defendant is against the judgment and decree passed by Commercial Sub Judge, Delhi on 6.6.1974 in Suit No. 185/1969 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 16,320.00 with costs and interest pendente life and future at 6% per annum on the principal amount against the defendant.(2) Briefly stated the allegations made in the plaint are that on 20.9.1966 the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs. 12,000.00 from the plaintiff and in consideration thereof a pronote and receipt on the same date agreeing to repay the said amount of loan Along with interest @ 1% per month. The plaintiff in his plaint had further prayed for a decree for another sum of Rs. 4,320.00 towards interest at the aboverate, which according to the plaintiff is due from the defendant.(3) The defendant contested the suit by filing the written statement, wherein he denied to have executed any pronote in favor of the plaintiff after receiving consideration thereof.(4) On the bas...
Tag this Judgment!S.K. Gupta Vs. Ashok Malhotra and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IIIAD(Delhi)51; 1995(2)ARBLR95(Delhi); 1995(33)DRJ594
N.G. Nandi, J.(1) In the suit for specific performance of agreement of sale allegedly arrived at between the parties on 15.12.1987 and for specifically performing the terms thereof requiring the defendants to accept the balance price of sale consideration of Rs.7,90,000.00 , transfer complete and clear title in the property bearing No.1 adjoining Block No.90, measuring 194.5 sq. mts. situated at Malviya Nagar, New Delhi and for vacant possession thereof and in the alternative decree for exemplary damages for Rs.8,00,000.00 with costs, the plaintiff by this application seeks to restrain the defendants from transferring, selling or otherwise disposing of or parting with possession of the suit property or any portion thereof to or in favor of any person other than the plaintiff. (2) It has been submitted by Ms. Kumud Nijhawan counsel for the plaintiff that the receipt dated 15.12.1987 is a conclusive contract for the property worth Rs.8,00,000.00 ; that defendant No.2 is the wife of defen...
Tag this Judgment!Saraf Steel Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Delhi Financial Corporation and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IIIAD(Delhi)852; 1995(34)DRJ276
R.C. Lahoti, J.(1) This is a suit for declaration filed by the plaintiff seeking a decree that Section 29 of the Stale Financial Corporation Act, 1951 was ultra virus the constitution and a further declaration to the following effect : 'THAT a decree of declaration he passed declaring that the notice dated 19th December, 1988 issued by defendant No.2 on behalf of defendants No.1 which is annexure 'A' to the plaint is arbitrary, discriminatory and against the socialistic principles for which the Corporation has been established and, thereforee, the same is illegal and unenforceable. It be also declared that the amount as claimed in the said notice is not due to the defendants No.1 from the plaintiff and there is no intentional default on the part of plaintiff, is making of the payments to the defendants No.1 Corporation.'(2) It appears that the plaintiff had made borrowings from the Delhi Financial Corporation in the year 1981. It could not honour the schedule of repayment. On 15.12.198...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Trading Co. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi (Delhi Electric S ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1996RLR41
Y.K. Sabharwal, J.(1) In 1992, petitioner through its Director, G.S. Madan filed this petition for quashing the levy of misuse charges in respect of electricity connection in H-9/B-1, Mohan Coop. Ind. Estate for quashing the notice dated 16th/17th June, 1992 and restraining the respondent from disconnection of supply for non-payment of misuse charges. Briefly, the case set up in the W.P. is : (2) The petitioner commenced garment manufacturing operations from premises w.e.f. 18.2.92. The premises were originally allotted to Raghubir Singh who had appointed G.S. Madan as his lawful attorney. G S Madan on behalf of Raghubir Singh applied for and was granted completion certificate license and permanent power connection and the Desu, on completion of commercial formalities, directed the release of industrial load in the said premises. The load was energised by Desu on or about 1.1.90. In terms of Will of late Raghubir Singh the premises devolved upon father of G.S. Madan, namely, Puran Sing...
Tag this Judgment!Veena Aggarwal Vs. Managing Committee, Shri Lakshmi NaraIn Trust, Guja ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IIIAD(Delhi)126; 59(1995)DLT167
S.D. Pandit, J.(1) Rule D.B. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties at length. Learned Counsel for the parties have also taken us through the various documents on record. We, thereforee, proceed to dispose of this petition finally. (2) Petitioner Veena Aggarwal is working as a Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) with the respondent No. 1 Gujarat Senior Secondary School. She had joined the said School about 29 years ago. She is also one of the members of the Managing Committee of the said School. On 14.4.1993, respondent No.4, Manager of the Institute which runs the said School issued an advertisement inviting applications for appointment to the post of Principal for the said School. Petitioner, Veena Aggarwal, as also respondent No. 4 Seema Aggarwal, had applied for the said post. Interviews for selection were held on 6.8.93 and in the said selection Ms. Seema Aggarwal was selected and she joined as Principal on 2.9.1993. (3) Petitioner has averred that the said school is governed by...
Tag this Judgment!Sumita Sarkar Vs. Principal, Kalindi College and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IIIAD(Delhi)53; 59(1995)DLT676; 1995(34)DRJ389; 1995LabIC373; (1996)ILLJ753Del
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought quashment of the order of termination of the petitioner as part-time Lecturer/Guest Lecturer in music and for mandamus requiring the respondent to appoint the petitioner as lecturer in music on a regular basis. (2) The facts leading to the filing of the present petition, in brief, are that Kalindi College is affiliated to Delhi University and is aided by U.G.C. and is governed by the rules and regulations pertaining to the Delhi University. The petitioner was appointed as part-time lecturer in music on adhoc basis at the stipend of Rs.500.00 per mensem initially and the same was increased to Rs.1,000.00 per mensem and thereafter to Rs.l,500.00 per mensem. The petitioner continued to be given part-time/adhoc appointment for specific periods with break of certain days and some time vacations in the college from 30th January 1987 till her services were terminated on 29th September 1992. The contention of the petitioner is ...
Tag this Judgment!Surinder Grover Vs. Sheela Sahni and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995(33)DRJ576
N.G. Nandi, J. (1) In a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 14th January, 1985 relating to property bearing plot No.G-1, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi issues had been framed on 25th July, 1991 and it has been ordered that issue No.4 be heard as a preliminary issue. Issue No.4, reads as under:- 'WHETHER the suit is maintainable in view of provisions of Section 269UC of the Income-tax Act? If so, its effect?'(2) It is submitted by Mr. Makhija, counsel for the plaintiff that Section 269UC of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') is not attracted since it is an agreement to sell the property, specific performance whereof is claimed in the suit and the consideration is more than Rs.5 lakhs. That in the present case the agreement is dated 14th January, 1985 and Section 269UC of the Act came into force in 1987. That apart from the relief of specific performance, the suit of the plaintiff is for compensation and damages and suit would be maintainable and...
Tag this Judgment!