Delhi Court August 1995 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.
Kuldip Sharma Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-04-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ244
J.B. Goel, J.1. The appellant Kuldip Sharma, s/o Sh. Vyas Dev Sharma has been convicted by an Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi for offence under S. 302, IPC for having committed the murder of his wife Neelam on the night of 1-12-85 by strangulation, vide judgment dated 12-5-89 and vide separate order of sentence, he has been sentenced to life imprisonment. Being aggrieved, he has come in appeal.2. Briefly, the prosecution case is that the deceased Neelam along with her husband, the accused, had been living in a room on the 2nd Floor of Quarter No. 34C/1, Railway Colony, Punjabi Bagh. This was a Government flat having been allotted to one Satapal being an employee of the Railways. It consisted of 2 rooms, verandah one kitchen, bath etc. The said allottee had let out the said premises to one Rajender Prasad. Sh. Rajender Prasad along with his wife Smt. Chandra Kala (complainant) was living in one room, verandah and kitchen while other room had been let out to the accused where he and...
Nanu Ram Vs. Jagdish Pershad and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-04-1995
Reported in: 59(1995)DLT471; 1995(35)DRJ198; 1995RLR463
Mohd. Shamim, J.(1) The petitioner through the present petition has taken exception to an order dated September 3,1994 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Delhi whereby he disposed of the two applications under Section 47 & Section 144 of the Code of Civil Procedure moved in Execution Case No. 4/94, by Ms. Manjula and Shri Tarun Kumar, respondents herein. Both the applications were allowed and the judgment and decree dated September 19,1989 were set aside and the petitioner was directed to restore the possession over a part of the premises bearing No. 494-501, 514, Ward No. 7, Lahori Gate, Delhi to the respondents.(2) The petitioner also preferred an appeal against the said order insofar as the said order related to the restoration of possession before the learned District Judge being Mca No. 13/94. Since the present revision petition and the above said appeal arose out of one and the same order ( hereinafter referred to as the impugned order) both are being disposed of together vide th...
Jagmal Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-04-1995
Reported in: 1995(35)DRJ205
Usha Mehra, J.(1) Petitioner has challenged the action of the respondent thereby denying him his right to receive the disability pension. Facts leading to the filing of this petition are on 15th October,1987 the petitioner was on Casual Leave. He Along with Havaldar Balbir Singh went to meet his relation. While coming back from Bahadurgarh in order to rejoin the duty at their unit located at Delhi Cantt. they met with an accident at about 7.00 AM. A Dtc bus suddenly approached from behind. It hit the scooter of the petitioner from rear side. Consequently, the petitioner sustained sever injuries on his left leg. He was evacuated in a taxi to the Base Hospital of the Army, Delhi Cantt. Petitioner remained admitted in the hospital where he was operated. He was treated in the hospital and, thereforee, put in low medical category. It is further the case of the petitioner that a Court of enquiry was held to investigate the circumstances under which he sustained the injuries. The Commanding O...
Delhi Development Authority Vs. R.K. Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-03-1995
Reported in: 60(1995)DLT528
M.S.A. Siddiqui, J. (1) Eave to appeal sought for, is granted. (2) This appeal, by special leave, is by the D.D.A. preferred against the judgment dated 23.4.93 in Cri. Case No. 88/92 on the file of Mr. A.K. Garg, M.M., New Delhi, acquitting the accused/respondent of the offence punishable under Section 14 read with Section 29(2) of the Delhi Development Act, 1957. (3) Succinctly put; the case of the prosecution is that by are port dated 11.7.85 (Ex.PW-IA)of the Surveyor Shri Chandra Prakash (Public Witness l)itwasbroughttothe notice of the appellant that the respondents had permitted to be used a building bearing No. F-329, Az, Sudershan Park, New Delhi, to a non-conforming use inasmuch as an office-cum-factory under the name and style of M/s. Asha Mechanical Works was being run therein. According to the appellant, the land/ building falls in Zone G-3 and it can be used only for residential purposes in accordance with the Master Plan formulated in respect of the said Zone. The responde...
G.S. Bajwa Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-03-1995
Reported in: 59(1995)DLT742
S.D. Pandit, J. (1) Petitioner G. S. Bajwa was commissioned in Indian Air Force on 27-6-1970. He got his substantial post of Flight lieutenant on 27-06-1976. His fourth posting was at Udhampur in the year 1976. At that time Shri Dilbagh Singh was the Air Marshal. It is the claim of the petitioner that some explosives were to be transferred to N.A.L. from Udhampur by 30 Civil Road Transports. But the said' work was not given at one and the same time and it was being undertaken as a piecemeal transport job in case the said work were to be given as a whole for 30 Civil Transports then it would be beyond the jurisdiction of Shri Dilbagh Singh. It is his further claim that in the said Transport Contract some malpractice was being played and Rs. 700 to Rs. 800 were being paid in excess for each trip. thereforee, he made a complaint regarding the same and because of his complaint there was a saving of about Rs. 80.000 but by that act of his. Shri Dilbagh Singh was hurt and, thereforee, he ins...
Surya Agroils Limited Vs. Inter Continental Sales Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-02-1995
Reported in: 59(1995)DLT458; (1995)111PLR44
Vijender Jain, J. (1) ADMIT.MR. Jain, learned Counsel for the appellant says that he is ready to argue the matter and he does not wish to file any rejoinder. Appellant had entered into an Agreement with the respondent dated 1.1.1987, containing arbitration clause in the following terms:- 'THAT in the event of any doubt or difference or difficulty arising out of this agreement, it shall be referred to arbitration in accordance with the provisions of Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 or any enactment on statutory modification thereof from time to time'(2) Facts of the case are that appellant filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 65,052.28 paise. After the suit was filed, the respondent filed an application under Section 34 of the Indian Arbitration Act pleading inter alias that the suit of the appellant-plaintiff be stayed in view of the arbitration clause contained in the Agreement. The Trial Court came to conclusion that Section 34 of the Arbitration Act was applicable and, thereforee, ...
B.S. Verma and anr. Vs. Gordhan Sharma and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-02-1995
Reported in: 59(1995)DLT631
Devinder Gupta, J. (1) This application by defendants I and 2 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code') seeking directions as regards the result declared by the Court Commissioner on 30th March, 1994 and for issuing directions to the Court Commissioner to continue administering the school till fresh elections are held.(2) On 14th February, 1994 with consent of the learned Counsel for both the parties Justice Jagdish Chandra, a retired Judge of this Court, was appointed as a Commissioner to conduct the elections of Shaheed Udham Singh Society. He was also empowered to prepare the electoral roll and to decide the objections, if any, made by the parties. The Court Commissioner was also appointed as an Administrator to run the two schools managed by the Society. It is not in dispute that elections were conducted by the Commissioner, but no orders were passed thereafter as regards the handing over of the management of the schools to the elected Managing Committ...
Etona Company Ltd. Vs. Jakeman Engineering and Manufacturing Co. and o ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-02-1995
Reported in: 59(1995)DLT629; (1995)111PLR52
Devinder Gupta, J. (1) Plaintiff in this suit has claimed decree for injunction restraining defendants 1 to 14 from manufacturing and/or selling and/or offering for sale, or trading in any manner, in staples and stapler pins bearing the trade mark Etona or any other mark deceptively similar to and/or colourable imitation of Etona and from selling and offering for sale Etona staplers and stapling pins like A and B; which are not the manufacture of the plaintiff. Injunction has also been claimed against the defendants from using the offending mark Etona in relation to their products so as to pass off and/or to enable others to pass-off defendant Nos. 1 to 4's goods as and for the goods of the plaintiff or as goods in some manner connected or associated with the plaintiff. (2) PLAINTIFF'S case is that it has been dealing various types of office equipments and specialises in manufacturing staplers also referred as stapling machines and staple pins, also referred as staples. It is claimed t...
Swarup Vegetable Products Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-1995
Reported in: 60(1995)DLT13
K. Ramamoorthy, J. (1) The arbitrator in this case has passed a very short award and the award is as follows:- '1.The claim of U.O.I, for Rs. 1,76,085.00 being actual loss suffered on account of risk purchase is allowed. The breach on the part of the Contractor is established due to failure to discharge initial obligation to deposit 10% of value of the stores as security deposit by virtue of Clauses 9 and 10 read with 18, and the contract also having been cancelled on 13.10.84 on account of said breach. The deviation, urged on account of non stipulation for allocation of imported oil in the risk purchase contract is held to be of no consequence, for the simple reason, that nothing has been brought on the record to indicate that the alleged variation had any effect on the rate at which the risk purchase was made. It may further be stated that in the original A/T Clause 5(c)(v) t page 22 in the pleadings of U.O.I, clearly notified that, in the case of default, the defaulted/rejected quan...
T.B. Suntwal Vs. Food Corporation of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-1995
Reported in: 60(1995)DLT256
K. Ramamoorthy, J.(1) On 13.1.1992 Award has been passed by the Arbitrator. In paragraph 40 of the Award relating to the interest on the amounts awarded by him, the Arbitrator stated thus 'Accordingly, the respondent shall pay an interest of 15% per annum towards the outstanding security deposit from 22.2.88 to 15.3.91.' The claimant contractor approached the Arbitrator for the rectification under Section 13 of the Arbitration Act staling the interest should be not only on the security amount deposited but also on the outstanding bills. The parties appeared before the Arbitrator and left to the Arbitrator to decide on the question. The Arbitrator on 18.3.92 passed the following order : 'ACCORDINGLY,a simple interest @ 15% per annum is awarded towards outstanding security deposit and outstanding bills pertaining to Claim No. 2 from 22.2.88 up to 15.3.91.'(2) This is to set right the record. The Arbitrator was appointed pursuant to the order passed by this Court in Suit No. 1680/85 under...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »