Delhi Court December 2001 Judgments

Kaushalya Mehta Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 95(2002)DLT745

J.D. Kapoor, J. 1. This is a petition under Section 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for grant of probate to the last will and testament of late Shri Hans Bali son of late Shri Chiranji Lal Bali. 2. It is averred that Shri Hans Bali died issueless on 2nd August, 1992 whereas his wife has pre-deceased him. The brother of Shri Hans Bali namely Shri Dev Dutt Bali also died issueless in 1948. Shri Hans Bali, the deceased was in possession of the moveable and immovable assets, details of which have been given in Annexure-C. The Will was duly notarised before the Notary Public in the presence of Shri Sunil Dutt Bali and Smt. Kiran Dutta. 3. The notice of the petition was issued and served by way of publication to the general public. Nobody has filed any objection to the present petition. Since the deceased has some movable properties at Calcutta, a Local Commissioner was appointed for opening the lockers and preparing the inventory of the articles. 4. In order to prove the aforesaid fa...

Maruti Udyog Limited Vs. Mahalaxmi Motors Ltd. and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 95(2002)DLT290; 2002(61)DRJ398

J.D. Kapoor, J. 1. Admittedly the suit for recovery has been confined to the admitted liability of Rs. 7.63 crores. The documents referred to and relied upon by the plaintiff in this regard are as follows:-(i) Letter dated 5th April, 1997 by defendant No. 1. The relevant para of the same is as under:- 'As per the details given above, the shortfall in my vehicle purchase accounts with Maruti Udyog Limited totals to Rs. 763.22 lacs as of close of 31.03.1997. As per my earlier communication, I propose to make good the above shortfall with the following schedule: By 10.04.97 : Rs. 50.00 lacsBy 25.04.97 : Rs. 100.00 lacsBy 25.05.97 : Rs. 200.00 lacsBy 25.05.97 : Rs. 213.22 lacs --------------- Rs. 763.22 --------------- (ii) Minutes of the meeting dated 5th April, 1997 between plaintiff and defendant. Relevant portion of the same is reproduced as below:- 'MML also provided a letter No. 021/MML/97 dated 5.4.1997 wherein they admitted that there was a shortfall of Rs. 7.63 cr.' (iii) Affidavi...

S.i. Ramesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Police and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2002(62)DRJ340

Khan, J.1. Petitioner, SI in Delhi Police, is seeking stay of disciplinary proceeding initiated against him in view of pending criminal prosecution arising out of the same incident. Was such stay liable to be granted is the question.2. Petitioner had approached Tribunal for this but his OA No. 2523/2001 was dismissed by impugned order after it found that no complicated question of law was involved in the criminal prosecution.3. Petitioner's office was raided by CBI upon a complaint of demanding bribe. His two constables were arrested but he escaped. On search, two country made pistols and one knife was recovered from his almirah. CBI lodged FIR under Section 7 and 13(2) of POC Act and under Section 25/27 of Arms Act against him which is pending trial and in which prosecution has cited about 20 witnesses. Meanwhile, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him charging him of misuse of official premises by order dated 2.11.2000 which he is trying to ward off.4. Petitioner's case ...

Federation of Railway Officers Association Vs. Union of India and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2002IIAD(Delhi)923; 2002RLR285

A.K. Sikri, J.1. The Federation of Railway Officers'Association has come to this court by means of thepresent petition filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India. The subject matter isarbitrary, discriminatory, illegal and unjustifiableallotment and retention of the Railway pool houses toineligible officers/staff by the respondents. Thepetition is in the nature of public interestlitigation. The grievance made by the petitioner isthat the respondents have been allotting officialaccommodation from the Northern Railway pool at Delhi,which accommodation is specifically meant for allotmentto officers of the Northern Railways posted at Delhi,in favor of those officers/staff who are neitherentitled to nor eligible for housing accommodation outof the said pool and thereby gravely aggravating theexisting acute housing problem being faced by theofficers of Northern Railways posted at New Delhi. Itis stated in the petition that from time to time theRailway have been coming out withcircul...

Shyam Bihari Lal and Others Vs. C. Parthasarthy

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

Lokeshwar Prasad, President: 1. The present appeal, filed by the appellant, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), is directed against order dated 10.10.2001, passed by District Forum (West), Janakpuri, Delhi in Complaint Case No. 943/2000 entitled Shri Shyam Bihari Lal and Ors. v. Shri C. Parthasarhy, Chairman and Managing Director, Karvy Consultants Limited. 2. The facts, relevant for the disposal of the present appeal, lie in a narrow compass. The appellants, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondent, had filed a complaint, before the District Forum, under Section 12 of the Act with the prayer that the respondent be directed to issue equity shares of Reliance Petroleum under 4th conversion option of TO CD in respect of all the 13 folios and to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- per folio for financial, physical, mental and emotional sufferings. The appellants had also claimed a sum of Rs. 500/- per folio for the expenses...

Manjit Kumar and anr. Vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce and ors.

Court: DRAT Delhi

1. Heard Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari has appeared for respondent Bank. He also made submissions.The impugned order has been passed on an application moved by the appellants under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC saying that the recovery application of the respondent Bank is barred by law. I have perused Order VII Rule 11 of CPC, which reads as follows : (b) where the relief claimed is undervalued, and the plaintiff, on being required by the Court to correct the valuation within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so; (c) where the relief claimed is properly valued, but the plaint is written upon paper insufficiently stamped, and the plaintiff, on being required by the Court to supply the requisite stamp paper within a time to be fixed by the Court, fails to do so; (d) where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law; 2. The appellants appear to rely on Clause (d) of the aforesaid rule according to which, the ...

P.S. Ochani Vs. World Health Organisation and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 95(2002)DLT680; 2002(61)DRJ672

J.D. Kapoor, J. 1. Through this application, defendants have sought dismissal of the suit as being barred by law.2. Defendant No. 1 is a Specialised Agency of the United Nations within the meaning of the Charter of the United Nations. According to defendant No. 1, it enjoy complete immunity from every form of legal process under Article III Section 4 of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialised Agencies of the United Nations.3. Mr. Rajeev Nayar, learned senior counsel for defendants contends that these immunities have been specifically recognised and conferred upon the defendants by virtue of the United Nations Privileges & Immunities Act, 1947. By virtue of notification dated 16th December, 1948. By virtue of notification dated 16th December, 1948, the provisions of the said Act were extended to the defendants. This immunity is further fortified by an agreement dated 9th November, 1949 between the defendants and Government of India which specifically confers i...

All India Food and Allied Workers Union Vs. Delhi State Civil Supplies ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 96(2002)DLT194; [2002(95)FLR478]

Vikramajit Sen, J. 1. After detailed arguments were heard on 3.12.2001 the matter was adjourned for today on the request of Mr. V.K. Shali, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. The matter has again been heard at length but there has been no appearance on behalf of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. 2. It appears that about one thousand workers have been employed by Respondent No. 1 for a period of almost two decades. However, this employment is not direct, but through a labour contractor. Ms. Salwan, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 1 clarifies that tenders have been invited by Respondent No. 1 since 1984 and that 'transporters' and not labour contractors are engaged by this process. This does not appear to make the slightest difference for the reason that it is evident that there is a perennial requirement for workmen for effecting the distribution of food grains etc. to Fair Price Outlets through out the National Capital Territory. The nomenclature does no...

Gautam Adhikari and anr. Vs. Jagir Singh

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2002CriLJ911; 95(2002)DLT473

K.S. Gupta, J.1. Crl.M.(M) No.2664/95 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. which was allowed to be treated as a revision later on, was filed on 6th/13th November 1995 alleging that petitioner No.1 is the Executive Director while petitioner No. 2 is printer and publisher of 'The Times of India' newspaper owned by M/s.Bennett Coleman & Co.Ltd, 7, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi. On 25th September 1994, Sajjan Kumar, DPCC General Secretary and Member of Parliament held a Press Conference in which he invited journalists from various newspapers. News based on the statement made by Sajjan Kumar in the press conference was published bonafidely in the issue of 'Times of India' dated 26th September 1994 keeping in mind the interest of public. Last paragraph of the news item reported is as follows:-'In fact, in the case of 35 restaurants, all criteria had been given the go-by, Mr.Sajjan Kumar alleged. Several restaurants with unsavoury reputation of being dens of prostitution have been given licenses, h...

Rajesh Khanna and ors. Vs. Financial Commissioner of Delhi and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2002IVAD(Delhi)4

Mukul Mudgal, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India challenges an ex-parte order passed by the Financial Commissioner in appeal which reads as under:- 'Presented today in court by Shri Rajiv Vig, Adv. for the petitioners, an application under Section 151 of C.P.C. for preponement of the case. Heard. The operation of the impugned order dated 9.11.2001 passed by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Delhi is stayed till 14.12.2001 i.e. date of hearing of the appeal on the point of admission.' The Financial Commissioner has given a short returnable date i.e. 14th December, 2001 and has fixed the date for hearing of appeal even on the point of admission. This Court was not inclined to go into the merits of the petition due to the above reasons and the pendency of the dispute before the Financial Commissioner but the learned counsel for the petitioner wanted to argue the writ petition on merits.2. I have also perused the impugned order dated 9th November...