Delhi Court December 2001 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.
Savitri Devi Vs. Fashion Linkers and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2001
Reported in: 2002IIIAD(Delhi)980; 95(2002)DLT893
V.S. Aggarwal, J. 1. Plaintiff, Mrs. Savitri Devi, has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs. 7,99,500/- besides possession of the premises No. A-51/1 Phase-I, Naraina Industrial Area (for short the premises in dispute) and for permanent and mandatory injunction. 2. The relevant facts alleged are that Gian Chand was the husband of the plaintiff. He was carrying on business of printing press at Premises No. 5397 Arya Samaj Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi in the name and style of M/s. Kissoo Mal Gian Chand. Gian Chand was also the owner in possession of the premises in dispute. He died on 18.12.1977 leaving behind his widow and an unmarried daughter Suman besides a son Girish. The entire property after the death of Gian Chand was mutated in the name of the plaintiff. He had left behind a will dated 13.12.1977 in which he bequeathed his property in favor of the plaintiff as the absolute owner. 3. It is further alleged that Gian Chand deceased was a friend of the husband of Mr. Asha Makkar...
Attar Chand JaIn Vs. Sudhir Kumar JaIn and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2001
Reported in: 2002IVAD(Delhi)490; 97(2002)DLT22; 2002(62)DRJ810
V.S. Aggarwal, J. 1. In pursuance of the auction purchaser (AttarChand Jain) having been successful purchaser of theproperty in question, he has preferred theapplication, alleging that the sale in his favor wasconfirmed on 12.2.1999. The property is stated to bein occupation of Surender Kumar Jain and DevinderKumar Jain (for short 'the Objectors') or on behalf ofjudgment debtors by Sunil Kumar Jain and Sanjay KumarJain (sons of Surender Kumar Jain), it is prayed thatwarrants of possession should be issued for deliveryof the physical possession of the suit premises to theauction purchaser.2. In reply/objections filed, it has been allegedthat the property in dispute had been purchased byLala Ram Chand. On the ground floor, the business wasstarted under the name and style of M/s. Kedar Nath RamChand. The said business was dissolved on Asad Sadi12, Samvat 1998 (equivalent to 6.7.1941). Thereafter,Nem Chand and Moti Lal started a partnership businessunder the name and style of M/s. Nem Chan...
Vinod Kumar and anr. Vs. Keshav Anand
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2001
Reported in: 2002IVAD(Delhi)358; 96(2002)DLT424; 2002(62)DRJ128
J.D. Kapoor, J.1. The facts giving rise to the application for leave to contest moved by the defendant under Order 37 Rule 3(5) of Civil Procedure Code are as under:- On representation of the defendant that he was facing financial problems the plaintiff no.1 advanced a loan of Rs. 6 lacs to him and the defendant on receipt of the said amount executed a receipt dated 5.3.97 and he also took a loan of Rs. 3 lacs from plaintiff no.2 and in consideration of the receipt of the said amount, the defendant also executed the receipt dated 5.3.97. The defendant also handed over the original title deeds in respect of property bearing no.A-4c-26, Janak Puri, New Delhi and executed a deed of mortgage in respect thereof. The defendant agreed to pay a minimum Installment of Rs. 10,000/- per month and had paid only two monthly Installments of Rs. 10,000/- and had not paid any amount after June, 1997 and according to the plaintiff the instant case is based upon the receipts as well as the agreement dat...
Ms. X Vs. Mr. Z and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2001
Reported in: 96(2002)DLT354; I(2002)DMC448
V.S. Aggarwal, J.1. The main question which craves for an answer is as to whether the petitioner can resist the request of respondent No. 1 for directing the Pathology Department of the All India Institute of Medical Science, New Delhi to prepare a slide containing the blood cells of respondent No. 1 and calling for the slides and blocks of the case relating to the petitioner and order a DNA test with a view to ascertain if respondent No. 1 is the father of the fetus.The petitioner's claim is that such an order would infringer has constitutional right of her privacy.2. The present application under consideration arises as a result of the following facts. The petitioner has filed a petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and adultery against respondent No. 1 under Section 10 of the Indian Divorce Act. The said petition is being contested on the ground of counter- allegations of similar nature.3. Respondent No. 1, by virtue of I.A. 3804/99 contends that case of the ...
K.C. Prasad Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2001
Reported in: 2002IIIAD(Delhi)1029
Dalveer Bhandari, J.1. The petitioner has approached this court with the prayer of fixing his seniority as Naib Subedar with effect from 1st March, 1990 vis-a-vis other JCOs of his batch instead of 1st March, 1992 as it exists at present. It is further prayed that the petitioner be promoted to the rank of Subedar with effect from 1st June, 1993. It is also incorporated in the prayer clause to reinstate the petitioner in service with effect from 31st July, 1996 with all consequentialbenefits of pay and allowances, seniority, perks and chances of promotion vis-a-vis his batch mates.2. The petitioner was enrolled in the Army Ordinance Corps on 9th July, 1970. He was promoted as Naik on 1st February, 1981, Havildar on 1st April 1983 and Company Quarter Master Havildar on 30th June, 1988. According to the petitioner, as per his original seniority he was due to be promoted as the Naib Subedar on 1st March, 1990 and Subedar on 1st June, 1993.3. There has been delay in promotion of the petitio...
S.K. Trading Corporation Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2001
Reported in: 2002(146)ELT50(Del)
V.S. Aggarwal, J. 1. M/s. S.K. Trading Corporation, hereinafterreferred to as the plaintiff/petitioner has filed thepresent suit for permanent injunction seeking torestrain the defendants (Union of Indian and Anr.)from demanding a sum of Rs. 6,75,725/- which in fact ita wrong calculation towards the penalty imposedagainst the plaintiff on account of short shipmentduring the year 1994 under PP/PT and NQ/NT quota.2. The facts alleged are that the plaintiff firmdeals in export of ready-made garments to UnitedStates of America under registration with the DirectorGeneral of Foreign Trade, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi.The plaintiff was allotted Past Performanceentitlement/past performance transfer (or shortPPE/PPT) and Non Quota Entitlement/Transfer Quotaunder the country/category USA during the year 1994.The plaintiff firm utilised the quota and its over allutilisation was 77.97% in PP/PT and 80% in Non quotaentitlement/transfer quota system which was in termsof the agreement. Later on due to s...
Resident Doctors Association of A.i.i.M.S. and anr. Vs. All India Inst ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2001
Reported in: 2002IVAD(Delhi)57; 96(2002)DLT559; 2003(1)SLJ11(Delhi)
Mukundakam Sharma, J. 1. The members of the petitioner No. 1/Association herein are/were working as Junior and Senior Residents in the All India Institute of Medical Sciences. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that according to the Residency Scheme issued by the Central government under its letter dated June 5, 1992, the members of the petitioner No. 1/Association are entitled to free furnished accommodation in addition to the House Rent Allowance. Accordingly the members of the petitioner No. 1/Association have sought for a relief of issuance of a direction to the respondents to grant House Rent Allowance to the members of the petitioner No. 1/Association in addition to the free furnished accommodation with a further prayer that the respondents should be directed not to deduct House Rent Allowance from the respective salaries of the members of the petitioner No. 1/Association as the said action is unlawful, illegal and arbitrary. 3. Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted...
S.S. Ahluwalia Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2001
Reported in: 96(2002)DLT374
Dalveer Bhandari, J. 1. By this order I propose to dispose of CWP Nos. 637/96, 2169/97 & 638/96. All these petitions were filed by the petitioner, an officer of the Central Reserve Police Force (in short 'CRPF') with different prayers. 2. In CWP 637/96, the petitioner prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 12.5.1995 issued from the office of the Director General, PAO, CRPF pertaining to payment of gratuity, commutation value of pension and leave encashment. 3. In CWP 638/96, the petitioner prayed that order dated 12.7.1995 be quashed. He also prayed that the respondents be directed to regularizesperiod of service with effect from 9.4.1993 to 30.5.1993 on duty instead of deduction these days from his earned leave. He has also prayed that the respondents be directed to redetermine the leave encashment claim of the petitioner at the time of his retirement without treating above mentioned period as earned leave and consequently to give benefit of 240 days leave encashment in...
integrated Fire Protection Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Director of Purchase ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2001
Reported in: 2002IIAD(Delhi)962
A.K. Sikri, J.1. This appeal is preferred by the appellants against the judgment and order dated 18th September, 2001 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 5064/2001 filed by the appellants herein. By means of the aforesaid writ petition, the appellants had challenged the award of contract to the respondent No. 5.2. It may be mentioned that the respondent No. 1 had invited the tenders for supply of 1,01,200 ltrs. of Aqueous Film Forming Foam(AFFF). Amongst others, the appellants as well as the respondent No. 5 submitted their bids. Both these parties were eligible to bid. After the evaluation of the tenders submitted by the parties, bid of the respondent No. 5 was accepted and it was awarded the contract for supply of the aforesaid material. In the writ petition filed by the appellants herein challenging the same, the main contention of the appellants was that the bids were not properly evaluated and further that the price quoted by the appellants was less than the price at whi...
Alika Khosla Vs. Thomas Mathew and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-2001
Reported in: 2002(62)DRJ851
V.S. Aggarwal, J. 1. The main question which craves for an answer isas to whether the petitioner can resist the request ofrespondent No. 1 for directing the Pathology Departmentof the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, NewDelhi to prepare a slide containing the blood cells ofrespondent No. 1 and calling for the slides and blocksof the case relating to the petitioner and order a DNAtest with a view to ascertain if respondent No. 1 isthe father of the fetus. The petitioner's claim is that such an orderwould infringe her constitutional right of herprivacy. 2. The present application under considerationarises as a result of the following facts. the petitioner has filed a petition for dissolution ofmarriage on the ground of cruelty and adultery againstrespondent No. 1 under Section 10 of the Indian DivorceAct. The said petition is being contested on theground of counter-allegations of similar nature. 3. Respondent No. 1 by virtue of I.A. 3804/99 contendsthat case of the petitioner is ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »