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.
Mahinder Singh Vs. Iqbal Kaur and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-1995
Reported in: 1995IIIAD(Delhi)760; 1995(35)DRJ275; 1995RLR469
Manmohan Sarin, J. (1) The appellants in this appeal are assailing the order dated 30.03.1995 passed by the Learned Single Judge, whereby the amendments sought in the written statement by the appellants were declined in the pending probate petition. The deletion of averments sought was that appellant's father Late Shri Sardar Gopal Singh never executed any Will during his life time. Additionally the appellants sought to aver that the deceased had executed another Will dated 31.10.1990, which was subsequent to the Will dated 02.07.1990, which was the subject matter of the pending petition. (2) The facts in brief culminating in the present appeal may be briefly stated:- (I)SARDARGopal Singh, a Hakim, expired on 18.11.1990 leaving behind his widow, one unmarried daughter, three sons and two married daughters. The widow of the deceased namely Iqbal Kaur and the unmarried daughter Jasmit Kaur filed a probate petition case No.35/91, seeking probate of Will dated 02.07.1990, of late Sardar Go...
Chaudhary Construction Co. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-1995
Reported in: 1995(34)DRJ487
S.K. Mahajan, J. 1. Under contract No. 40(1977-78)Old-New No.5/1978-79, awarded by respondent No. 1 to the petitioner, certain disputes had arisen during its execution and the same were accordingly referred to the arbitration of respondent No. 2 in terms of the arbitration agreement as contained in the contract. The arbitrator after entering upon reference and hearing the parties made and published his award on 25th October, 1985. On the said award having been filed in Court, notice was issued to the parties and respondent No. 1 has filed objections to the same.2. In short, the objections are that the arbitrator has not given a speaking award as stipulated in terms of the reference nor the award is supportable by any evidence on record. It is also alleged that the arbitrator has allowed various claims of the petitioner company and awarded amount there under without any material on record nor it had been shown by the petitioner company that it had suffered any loss and, thereforee, acco...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›