Delhi Court May 1999 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1999 Page 25 of about 243 results (0.041 seconds)Satpal Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-01-1999
Reported in: 1999IVAD(Delhi)321; 79(1999)DLT576; (1999)122PLR18
Usha Mehra, J.1. The petitioner was enrolled as a combatant soldier in the Army on 9th June, 1982. At the time of enrolment, complete medical checkup was done of the petitioner as prescribed under the military rules. At the time of his induction in the Army, he was not suffering from any kind of disease. No remarks or note to that effect was given by the Medical Board at the time of his entering the service.2. The petitioner after enrolment underwent training and other activities in the peace as well as in the forward areas. In the year 1990 petitioner developed mental problem as a result of which he was admitted in the Military Hospital. On account of his mental ailment he was placed in permanent low medical category 'EEE'. After the petitioner was placed in the permanent low medical category he was recommended for Medical Board. The Medical Board which was constituted assessed the disability element of the petitioner above 20% and recommended invalidating out of service the petitione...
Tag this Judgment!Saira Bano Vs. State (Govt. of Nct) Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-01-1999
Reported in: 79(1999)DLT637
S.N. Kapoor, J. 1. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been deprived of his right of bail under Sub-section (2) of Section 167, Cr.P.C. by not releasing her on bail. It is claimed that the petitioner was arrested on , 21.5.1999 for allegedly she was found in possession of 50 gms. of smack. During the pendency of investigation without obtaining the report of the CFSL, charge-sheet was filed by the police before the Court on 29.8.1998 while the sample of the case property was lying with the police as the sample could not be deposited with any Forensic Laboratory for examination. It is submitted that investigation was incomplete.2. There is no dispute about the fact that till 15th December, 1998 the sample was not delivered to and accepted by any C.F.S.L. According to the prosecution and as is evident the entries in Malkhana Register (photocopies thereof have been kept on record) it was sent to CFSL, Chandigarh on 10.6.1998, they refused to take it. On 1...
Tag this Judgment!Vakil Chand Bindal Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-01-1999
Reported in: 1999IVAD(Delhi)316; 79(1999)DLT673; 1999(50)DRJ9
M.S.A. Siddiqui, J.1. By the agreement No. 5/EE/SED/87-88 dated 30.9.1987, the petitioner was awarded the work of construction of cement concrete paths and pavements in Pocket-C, SFS Houses, Section-F, Sarita Vihar, Delhi. As per the agreement, the work was to start on 10.10.1987 and was to be completed on or before 9.2.1988. However, the work could not be started within the stipulated period and the contract was rescinded on 21.3.1988. Disputes and differences between the parties in respect of the contract in question were referred to the Arbitrator, who gave his award on 30.4.1992. On 27.4.1993, the Arbitrator Mr. A.L. Garg filed his award. Notice of filingof the award was given to the parties. The respondent DDA filed objections under Sections 30/33 of the Arbitration Act against the award, which have been opposed by the petitioner.2. The objections of the DDA having been opposed, the following issues were framed:1. Whether the award is liable to be set aside on the grounds of objec...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›