Delhi Court September 1999 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1999 Page 2 of about 308 results (0.050 seconds)Sanjay @ Dinesh @ Kala Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1999VIAD(Delhi)225; 82(1999)DLT217; 1999(51)DRJ644
ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J.1. The petitioner by this petition has challenged the detention order dated 23rd April, 1999 passed by the Commissioner of Police under subsection (2) of Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 (for short the Act) with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.3. Mr. R.K. Jain, Sr. Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner argued that the impugned order is liable to be quashed on the ground that on 23.4.1999 the petitioner was in jail when the order of detention was passed; that there was no material before the detaining authority to show that there was an imminent possibility of the petitioner being released on bail; and that in the grounds of detention a case FIR No. 680 dated 23.12.1997 under Section 324/307/34 IPC PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi was shown to be pending trial, whereas the petitioner had already been acquitted in the said case on 9th April, 19...
Tag this Judgment!Juhi Modi Vs. Neeraj Gupta and Another
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1999VIAD(Delhi)178A; 82(1999)DLT167; II(1999)DMC668
ORDERK.S. Gupta, J.1. This petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeks the quashing of an order dated 22nd February, 1999 passed by a Metropolitan Magistrate by which items listed at Nos.1 & 8 of the seizure memo dated 15th October, 1998 were ordered to be delivered to Neeraj Gupta, respondent No.1 on his executing super diginama in the sum of Rs. 30,000/-.2. It is admitted case of the parties that after the registration of FIR No.997/98 under Sections 406/498-A/34IPC PS Sriniwas Puri on the complaints made by the petitioner against her husband respondent No. 1 and others on 14th October, 1998, a raid was conducted by the Police and, amongst others, one double bed, one sofa set and one dressing table were seized from the bed room of petitioner and respondent No. 1. These items are listed at Sl. Nos. 1 & 8 in the seizure memo dated 15th October, 1998. It is further not in dispute that on this application filed on 16th October, 1998 by the...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Chand Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1999VIAD(Delhi)305; 2000CriLJ414; 82(1999)DLT356; 1999(51)DRJ551
ORDERDalveer Bhandari J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi dated 9.3.1978 by which the accused appellant was convicted under Section 376/511 IPC and sentenced to one year and six months rigorous imprisonment. 2. The accused appellant filed an appeal through Mr. R.K. Naseem, Advocate, who appeared at the time of admission of the appeal on 14.3.1978. This appeal has remained on Board for quite some time but no one appeared for the appellant. In this view of the matter, Ms. Reena Garg, Advocate, was appointed as amices Curiae in this case. 3. Brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this appeal are recapitulated below. 4. Hari Chand, appellant, who was then about 20-22 years of age was exployed as nursing orderly in Willingdon Hospital. The prosecutrix, aged about 23 years (unmarried) was admitted in the second floor emergency ward of the Willingdon Hospital as an in door patient. She was suffering from Asthma. Her mother...
Tag this Judgment!Jaspal Singh and ors. Vs. Commercial Officer/G. M. Airports Auth. of I ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1999VIAD(Delhi)430; 82(1999)DLT502; (2000)ILLJ744Del
ORDERA.K. Sikri, J.1. The petitioners who are 20 in numbers have filed this writ petition with the following prayers: (a) Issue directions directing the respondents to regularise the service of the petitioners from the date of their joining along with other arrears of difference in pay scale and all other consequential benefits: (b) Issue the directions for stay of the illegal action of handing over of customs detained baggage warehouse to department of Customs, till the decision of this court; (c) To issue any other appropriate direction to take civil and criminal action against the respondents for indulging in an unfair labour practice, against the provision of Industrial Dispute Act,1947. (d) to issue directions directing the inclusion of appropriate definition of CASUAL in the Industrial Disputes Act,1947. (e) Pass any other order or orders as may be deemed fit and just under the facts and circumstances of the case. (f) Award the costs of the present petition in favor of the p...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Hashim Masood Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1999VIAD(Delhi)609; 82(1999)DLT272
ORDERM.S.A. Siddiqui, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 10.7.1996 passed by the Special Judge, Delhi directing separate trial of the petitioner in respect of the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC, under Section 63 of the Copyright Act and under Sections 78/79 of the Trade Mark and Merch-andise Act.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to this revision are that Sub Inspector Magan Singh, on the basis of some secret information, raided the godown of the Jullandhar Delhi Transport Company and recovered two cartoons containing certain gas regulators on 24.9.1991. On interrogation, Shri Ashok Kumar, an agent of the said transport company, disclosed that the seized regulators were booked by Pawan Kumar Gupta owner of M/s. Gupta Agencies. Thereupon a case under Section 63 of the Copyright Act and under Section 78/79 of the Trade Mark and Merchandise Act and Section 420-IPC was registered against the accused Pawan Kumar Gupta. During investigation of the case, hou...
Tag this Judgment!Bulbul Chakrabartty and Others Vs. Ram Kumar and Others
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2001ACJ705; 1999VIAD(Delhi)604; 82(1999)DLT330; 1999(51)DRJ538
ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the award dated 30.7.1987 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal on the claim petition filed by the appellants on account of the death of Sh. Prosod Chakrabartty as a result of a road accident that occurred on 29.8.1982. In the claim petition filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal the appellants herein claimed an amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- as just and fair compensation on account of death of Sh Prosod Chakrabartty as a result of the aforesaid road accident. 2. The appellants, as petitioners, alleged that on 29.8.82 when the deceased was coming from his house at Shalimar Bagh and was going towards Irwin Hospital, he was hit by bus No. DHP - 3767 near the Old Secretariat Gate, Civil Lines, as a result of which the deceased sustained injuries and thereafter he died. It was stated in the said petition that the deceased was 36 years of age at the time of his death and was earning Rs. 17,000/- pe...
Tag this Judgment!Jayant Gas Service and ors. Vs. Delhi Vidyut Board
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2000IAD(Delhi)45; AIR2000Delhi52; 82(1999)DLT445; 2000(52)DRJ65
ORDERDr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. This petition is directed against the order dated 6.9.1999 passed by the Additional District Judge, Delhi, in MCA No. 47/1999 allowing the appeal filed by the respondent against the order dated 26.2.1999 passed by the Civil Judge grating ad interim injunction in favor of the petitioners. 2. The petitioners herein are in occupation of three LPG godowns as licensees and their licences are expiring on 31.3.2000, 31.3.1999 and 31.3.2000 respectively. It was alleged in the suit filed by the plaintiffs/petitioners that the respondent/defendant started construction for 220 KV Transmission Line Tower in front of the godown of plaintiff No.1 and that the base of the said tower would be 20 ft. x 20 ft. which would not only cause problems and difficulties for the petitioners/plaintiffs while loading and unloading of gas cylinders, but might also cause accidents like setting the godowns on fire. Accordingly the petitioners/plaintiffs sought for a perpetual and mandatory ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhartiya Construction Company Vs. Delhi Development Authority and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 86(2000)DLT6; (2000)126PLR51
J.B. Goel, J.1. This petition under Section 8 and Section 20(4) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (for short 'the Act') is for appointment of an Arbitrator by the Court.2. Petitioner's tender for certain work out of the work of 'construction of houses at Sarita Vihar, Sector 1, Pocket A Group IV' was accepted vide letter dated 18.9.1990 and Agreement No. 7/EE/SED-4/DDA/90-91 was executed between the parties. The contract is governed by the General Conditions of the Contract Clause 25 of which provides for resolving the disputes arising out of the contract by arbitration. The Chief Engineer of DDA is the Designated Authority to appoint the Arbitrator. The work was to be completed within 12 months, i.e., by 27.9.1991, but was actually completed on 7.4.1994. Due to delay various disputes arose including claims for increase in rates of labour and material. The Arbitrator was not appointed in spite of contractor's notice and he had to file a petition under Section 20 of the Act being Suit No. 18...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagwati Prasad Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2000IAD(Delhi)747; 83(2000)DLT116; 2000(52)DRJ157
ORDERN.G. Nandi, J.1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for the quashing of the office orders dated 20.12.1995 and 4.7.1996 (Annexures 'B' & 'C-1') whereby the petitioner's claims for tempo-rary status as Peon and regularisation of his services in the post of Peon on regular basis as and when vacancy is available in the Secretariat of the National Commission for Minorities (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission') which have been rejected And for direction to grant petitioner temporary status from the date of his initial appointment on regular basis on the post of peon with pay in accordance with law with arrears. 2. The say of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed on 7.7.1993 as a Peon on daily wage basis and since then the petitioner has been continuously working till today without any break; that the petitioner had completed 240 days in a year sometimes in March 1994 and according to the existing instructions of ...
Tag this Judgment!Kulwant Singh (Havildar) Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2000IAD(Delhi)783
ORDERN.G. Nandi, J. 1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's fresh option certificate for extension of two years's Army service. 2. The say of the petitioner is that the petitioner joined the Army service on 30.9.1975 at the age of 18 years and presently servicing with 53 Engineer Regiment completing his 24 years of service by 30.9.1999; that the Government of India, vide their Signal No. 351706/A5/PS-2 (C) dated 15.5.1998 had asked to submit the option/non-option certificate for extension /enhancement in retirement age by two years in all ranks in a specific form : that the Havildar is authorised for 24 years of service and age limit of 45 years, whichever is earlier ; that a privilege/opportunity has been given for those effected personnels who were going to discharge before completing their terms of engagement of service due to completing their early retirement age; tha...
Tag this Judgment!