Delhi Court April 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.
Navyug School Education Society and Others Vs. Navyug School Parents A ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2001
Reported in: 2001VAD(Delhi)778; 92(2001)DLT415; 2001(59)DRJ574
ORDERKhan, (J.)1. These two Appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 18.2.99 passed in CWP 5141/94 filed by respondents 1 and 2 and being identical on facts and in law are being disposed of by this common order. While first Appeal is filed by Navyug School Education Society and NDMC, the second is by the affected party whose appointment to the post of Vice Principal and Principal of Navyug School at Peshwa Road stands quashed by impugned judgment.2. It transpires that this School was a primary school first and was upgraded to secondary level and then to Senior Secondary level necessitating creation of post of Vice Principal and Principal. Appellant in LPA No.100/99 was its headmistress first and was subsequently appointed to post of Vice Principal and Principal triggering this litigation. The School admittedly belongs to NDMC and is run by it and a lot of confusion surrounds the set of Rules regulating service conditions of teachers working in it. Though it is claimed that NDMC had...
Smt. Harbans Kaur and Others Vs. Sh. Jai Bhagwan and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2001
Reported in: II(2001)ACC490; 2002ACJ1168; 2001VAD(Delhi)574; 92(2001)DLT342
ORDERKhan, (J) 1. When this appeal was being considered it was noticed that MACT and First Appellate Court had awarded paltry compensation amount of Rs. 12,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- respectively to appellants on the death of a 20 year old Gurcharan Singh, a student of M.A., who died in a road accident on 3.8.1971 2. Accordingly New India Assurance Company's counsel Mr. B.R. Sabharwal was directed notice and required to obtain instructions for an appropriate enhancement of compensation. He appeared on 8.2.2001 and sought time to explore such possibility. But he failed to turn up today leaving us with no option but to decide the appeal on merit. 3. We have examined the Tribunal award and also he First Appellate Court judgment and find that both courts had adopted a novel method of assessing the dependency. Tribunal had fixed it at Rs. 150/- p.m. for first 5 years and Rs. 50/- p.m. for subsequent 5 years to award compensation of Rs. 12,000/- by taking the survival period of deceased at 10 ye...
M/S. Continental Profiles Ltd. Vs. Mr. Gopal Bali
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)DLT204; 2001(59)DRJ66
ORDERVikramajit Sen, J. Caveat No. 32/2001.1. Since the Caveator is represented through counsel caveat stands disposed off.SAO 15/2001.2. The question which has been raised in this Second Appeal is whether a company, which had rented and relinquished premises prior to the filing of the eviction petition under Section 14(1)(h) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') could nonetheless be evicted on the ground, namely, of having acquired vacant possession of A-40, Chittaranjan Park, New Delhi. The Additional Rent Controller, as well as the Rent Control Tribunal, has found against the Tenant.3. Mr. Sudhir K. Luthra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Appellant, firstly contended that this ground ought not to have been considered for the reason that the concerned premises, i.e. A-40, Chittaranjan Park, New Delhi had been brought into perspective and to the consideration of the Courts by means of a belated amendment to the petition. These premises were not av...
Shri Suraj Prakash Sharma Vs. Smt. Shakuntla Rani Diwan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2001
Reported in: 2001VAD(Delhi)73; 92(2001)DLT364; 2001(59)DRJ408
ORDERVikramajit Sen, J. 1. The premises appear to have been let out to the tenant (who has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution) in 1982 by Shri Sheetal Prashad Diwan. In 1993 Mr. Sheetal Prashad Diwan entered into an maintenance agreement with his wife Smt. Shakuntla Rani Diwan giving her the right to recover rent from the tenant, who attorney to her without any demur.2. A Notice dated 26.4.1993 was issued by Smt. Shakuntla Rani Diwan to the tenant complaining of the non-payment of rent. The Notice appears to have been ignored thus necessitating the filing of a petition under Section 14(1)(a) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on the grounds of non-payment of rent. Two years thereafter an order under section 15(4) of the Act was passed against the tenant. On non-compliance of this order, on 17.7.1997, the defense of the tenant was struck off. It is the case of the tenant that at this stage he had entered into a purchase Ag...
Sh. A.R. Wig Vs. the United India Fire and General Insurance Co. and O ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2001
Reported in: II(2001)ACC477; 2001IVAD(Delhi)883; 92(2001)DLT334
ORDERKhan, J. 1. Appellant a journalist, was seriously injured in a road accident way back in 1971 and just four months after he was married. He suffered fracture of his left bone, rupture of his ligaments, dislocation of his central hip bone etc. and filed a claim Suit No. 191/71 him only 46,240/- with 6% p.a. conditional interest by award dated 23.2.1976.2. Both appellant and Insurance Company filed appeals against this award. Appellant raised his compensation claim to Rs. 3.21 lakhs and company sought setting aside of tribunal award. He supported his claim by a Medical Certificate of three Safdarjung Hospital Surgeons certifying that his right leg was shortened by 3/4th of an inch and that he had suffered 58% permanent physical impairment and loss of physical functions to his left lower extremity. Upon this First Appellate Court raised compensation on certain heads like general damages from Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 40,000/- and for medical expenses to Rs. 10,000/- and awarded a total com...
Vivek Jolly Vs. Sri Ram and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2001
Reported in: 2001IVAD(Delhi)885
ORDERK.S. Gupta, J.1. Plaintiff filed this application under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 read with section 151 CPC for issue of ad interim injunction restraining defendant No.6 from in any manner demolishing or interfering with the use and occupation of property bearing No.39 & 40 Village Begumpur, P.O. Malviya Nagar, New Delhi.2. Suit was filed by plaintiff alleging that he Along with defendant No.4 are partners of the firm M/s.Profile India which is engaged in the business of exports. Defendant No.2 was allotted Plot Nos.39 and 40 measuring 240 sq.yds and 260 sq.yds respectively in Begumpur by Delhi State Harijan Cooperative Association Ltd in or about 1st October 1972. Plaintiff and defendant No.4 purchased property bearing Nos.39 and 40 for a total consideration of Rs.18 lakhs under a registered sale deed dated 21st April 1998 from defendant No.2. Entire sale consideration excepting Rs.3 lakhs was paid through cheque/bank draft. It is further alleged that said property has since been muta...
Gunner Mamraj Vs. the Chief of the Army Staff and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2001
Reported in: 2001(59)DRJ247
ORDERKhan, J.1. The primary question involved in this Appeal is whether order discharging Appellant from service was invalid for having been passed by an incompetent Authority.2. Appellant was convicted and sentenced by the Court Martial four times and had earned four 'red ink' entries. He was put on show cause notice dated 15.9.1994 informing him that his retention is service was undesirable under para 590 of Artillery Records Instructions, 1990 and Army Headquarter Letter No. A/13210/159/AG/PS 2(c) dated 28.12.1988 and to show cause why his services be not terminated under Army Rule 13(3)(v). He replied to this, but was discharged all the same vide discharge certificate dated 1.10.1994 communicated and signed by his Commanding Officer.3. Appellant filed CW 2674/95 to challenge this on a variety of grounds also questioning the court martial proceedings and the charges leveled against him etc. Though his general grievance was that respondents had not replied to the objections taken by ...
Smt. Shanta Devi and Others Vs. Sh. Charchal Singh and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2001
Reported in: II(2001)ACC675; 2003ACJ37; 2001VAD(Delhi)776
ORDERKhan, (J).1. One Dharam Singh Tyagi, a 37 year old practicing Advocate died in a road accident on 21.11.1070. His LRs filed a claim suit claiming a compensation of Rs.2 lakhs with 12% p.a. interest. But MACT assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.700/- and deducted Rs.200 from it to work-out dependency at Rs.500/- and applied a multiplier of 14 to it, awarding compensation of Rs.67,950/- after making some deductions.2. Appellants filed FAO 327/80 for enhancement and respondents 1 and 4 also filed cross objections in it wanting the award of compensation to be restricted to Rs.15000/-. First Appellate Court, however, upheld the assessment of income of deceased made by tribunal but raised the multiplier from 14 to 24 to award compensation of Rs.1.44 lakhs with 12% p.a. interest.3. Appellant still felt dis-satisfied with this and have failed this appeal for further enhancement of compensation. Their counsel Mr.Goyal has taken us through the evidence on record to show that the decea...
Nagina Kumar Vs. Central Public Works Department and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2001
Reported in: 2001VAD(Delhi)17; 93(2001)DLT309; 2001(63)DRJ315; (2001)IILLJ1497Del
ORDERB.N. Chaturvedi, J. 1. The petitioner was working as a Peon on daily wages under respondent no.2. He was appointed in that capacity on 8.3.1999. From 1993 onwards till 1995.96 he worked for more than 240 days during the course of each year. He sought grant of temporary status in pursuance of Office Memorandum dated 10.9.1993 issued by Ministry of Personnel, P.G. and Pensions, Department of Personal and Training, Government of India, regularisation and payment of wages on par with his counter-parts employed on regular basis. He was, however, denied the same. He, thereforee, approached Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi with O.A. No. 860/97 praying for grant of temporary status regularisation and parity of wages with peons employed on regular basis. 2. The respondent 1 & 2 raised the plea that since the petitioner, who was employed as unskilled worker from 11.3.1993 on daily wages and was being paid from the administrative contingencies, had not rendered one...
Union of India and Others Vs. Head Costable Pyare Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-30-2001
Reported in: 94(2001)DLT586
ORDERKhan, (J).1. The short question that arises in this Appeal is whether there was any material before Commandant to retire Respondent under Rule 26 and whether it was obligatory on him to record satisfaction that it was inexpedient and impracticable to take disciplinary proceedings to logical conclusion in order to take recourse to administrative action.2. Respondent joined BSF in 1968. He was charged of allowing NAKA (illegal passage on border) for Rs.1,000/- on 30.3.1974. Commandant ordered recording of evidence against him under Rule 48 of BSF Rules on 11.9.74. Three prosecution witnesses were examined in this but no further disciplinary proceedings were taken pursuant thereto. On the contrary he issued a show cause notice to Respondent on 16.1.1975 under Rule 26 of BSF Rules for his retirement from service. Respondent submitted his reply but commandant found it unsatisfactory and passed order dated 26.2.75 ordering his retirement from service. He failed a revision against this w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »