Delhi Court August 1997 Judgments

Sudarshan Devi Vs. Mohd. Yasin

Court: Delhi

Reported in: II(1997)ACC268; 1998ACJ1212; 1997IVAD(Delhi)1021; 68(1997)DLT122; 1997(43)DRJ309; (1998)118PLR51

Devinder Gupta, J. (1) This is an appeal against the judgment dated 4.8.1989 of learned Single Judge in Fao 79/80 - Sudarshan Devi and another v. Mohd. Yasin and others - dismissing the appellants' appeal and thereby affirming the order of Shri B.L. Garg, Presiding Officer, M.A.C.T., Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Case No.62/82 by which the Claims Tribunal had dismissed the claim petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1938. The facts in brief are that on 18.3.1982 a claim petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1938 was preferred by the appellants being the widow and son respectively of one Bhagwan Dass Taneja son of Kala Ram Taneja, residing at Sector 6, Quarter No.174, R.K. Puram, New Delhi, claiming a sum of Rs. 2 lacs towards the compensation for the death of Bhagwan Dass Taneja, who was stated to have expired in a fatal accident on 13.12.1981. It was alleged that on 13.12.1981 the deceased was going on his cycle to ward his house when he was hit by a ...

Geetha S. Nair Vs. Delhi Administration

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 68(1997)DLT118; 1997(43)DRJ305

Devinder Gupta, J.(1) The petitioner, who has been working as Assistant Teacher in Kerala School run by the Kerala Education Society, the third respondent has challenged the selection made by the Departmental Promotion Committee of the third respondent on 29.11.1994 recommending the 4th respondent to the post as T.G.T. (Biology). (2) The basis for the challenge is that the petitioner being the senior most Assistant Teacher with more than 5-1/2 years teaching experience has been ignored in preference to respondent No.4, who was employed in non-teaching category as Laboratory Assistant and was not eligible for being considered for promotion to the post of T.G.T.(Biology). (3) The admitted facts are that the petitioner having degree of B.Sc. & B.Ed. was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Kerala School run by respondent No.3 pursuant to the offer (annexure-P.4) dated 28.2.1989. She joined the school on 1.3.1990 and her appointment was duly approved with effect from 15.7.1989 by the Director...

Ved Prakash Gupta Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1997IVAD(Delhi)965; 68(1997)DLT106; 1997(43)DRJ93

Devinder Gupta, J.(1) In this writ petition instituted on 22.7.1994, the petitioner sought direction against the respondent/M.C.D. for opening of the result of the Promotion Committee kept in seal cover and to promote him as Assistant Engineer w.e.f. 30.8.1990 and to fix his seniority in the final seniority list of Assistant Engineers (Civil) dated 17.2.1993 with reference to the date of his initial appointment as Junior Engineer w.e.f. 30.7.1968 with all other consequential benefits.(2) It is alleged that the petitioner is in service under the respondent and had been assigned the work of an Assistant Engineer on 'current duty charge'. The service of the petitioner is regulated by the provisions of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, the D.M.C.Service (Control and Appeal) Regulations, 1959,CCS (C.C.A.) Rules and other rules and regulations pertaining to the employees of the Central Government. The petitioner along with five other works assistants, namely, Shri Madan Lal,Shri Ashok Kum...

Delhi Northern Railway Accounts Employees Co-operative Group Housing S ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 68(1997)DLT146

Devinder Gupta, J. (1) The petitioner which is a Co-operative Group Housing Society of the Delhi Northern Railway Accounts Employees in this writ petition filed under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India has prayed for quashing the order of Lt. Governor, Delhi as conveyed to it by the Director (Land), Dda, through letter dated 4.5.1992 (Annexure Y).(2) The facts in brief are that on 12.2.1976 an agreement (Annexure R-21/A) was entered into, amongst the petitioner and the President of India under which 29 bighas and 16 bids was of land situated at village Khureje Khas and Mandavali Fazalpur, Delhi was handed over to the petitioner Society initially for the purpose of development. It was further agreed that after development is completed by the petitioner to the satisfaction of the Chief Commissioner of Delhi a lease would be executed in petitioner's favor in respect of such residential plots out of residential plots to be carved out as may be determined in his ...

Vinood Chadha Vs. Delhi Development Authority

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1997VAD(Delhi)13; 68(1997)DLT174; 1997(42)DRJ499

Devinder Gupta, J.1. Petitioner has sought quashing of letter (annexure P-3) dated 13.1.1992 rejecting petitioner's highest bid for shop No.148, Rajendra Bhawan, Rajendra Place, New Delhi.2. Respondent invited prospective buyers in the auction of 16 shops at Rajendra Place, New Delhi located on plots 4 & 5. Date of auction was fixed as 14.8.1991. In the auction only three highest bids were accepted by the Officer conducting the auction with respect to shop Nos. 128, 144 and 148. There were no bids received for the remaining 13 shops. Petitioner being the highest bidder for shop No. 148 at Rs. 2,42,000/-, whose bid was provisionally accepted by the Officer conducting the auction, was asked to deposit 25% of the bid money, as per the terms and conditions of the auction, which the petitioner deposited. It is the petitioner's case that he visited the office of the respondent on 16.8.1991 and met the concerned official but was not issued any demand letter for the balance bid money. Repeated...

F.A.B. Axles (P) Ltd. Vs. F.A.G. Rugelfischer Georg Schafer

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1997VAD(Delhi)637; 1997(2)ARBLR453(Delhi); 68(1997)DLT433; 1997(42)DRJ517

Devinder Gupta, J.1. This appeal by the defendant is against an order passed on 4.2.1997 by learned Single Judge in is 6064/96 and is 6065/96 (in Suit No.1516/96). On 4.2.1997 learned Single Judge passed the following orders in the suit as well in the two misc. applications:'S.No.1516/96 2. One Mr. Devinder Singh appears for defendant FAB Axles Pvt. Ltd. He says that he has filed a caveat through Singh Bhatia Chatterjee but now he does not propose to engage a counsel.3. Since caveat had been filed by Singh Bhatia Chatterjee, notice to go to him as to why he had refused to take notice saying that he had nothing to do with caveat.4. Let written statement be filed within four weeks with advance copy to plaintiff.5. Re notify for 26.7.1997.is 6064/96 6. This is an application under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Representative of defendant seeks six weeks' time to file reply.7. Time granted.8. Heard.9. Considering the facts and circumstances of t...

Smt. Raj Rani Bahl Vs. Union Bank of India

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

A.P. Chowdhri, President: 1. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that M/s. Sympathy Chit Finance Ltd. had Account No. 29146 with the Punjabi Bagh Branch of the Union Bank of India, opposite party for short. The Chit Finance Company had three Directors, namely, Mrs. Raj Rani Bahl, Mr. Manoj Bahl and Mrs. Shammi Bahl. Mrs. Raj Rani Bahl also had a personal account in the same branch of the Bank, namely Account No. 20817. The Chit Finance Company issued a cheque for Rs. 25,000/- in favour of one Rakesh Kumar dated 23.5.1991. The cheque was drawn by Smt. Raj Rani Bahl as Director of the said Company. The payee deposited the cheque with SBI and it was sent for clearance and was returned with the remarks "Insufficient Funds". The cheque appears to have been presented again through New Bank of India, when it was cleared, the version of the Union Bank of India is that a personal assurance had been given by Smt. Raj Rani Bahl that the balance amount would be deposited and that the cheque...