Delhi Court September 2001 Judgments

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Surender Deo Gaur and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 94(2001)DLT714; 2002(61)DRJ15

ORDERSanjay Kishan Kaul, J. 1. A suit was filed by respondent No.1 against the appellant and respondents 2 to 5 for possession and for recovery of mesne profits/interest or in the alternative for recovery of Rs.77,99,417.40p. The subject matter of the suit relate to a part of colony known as Jaidev Park Colony village Basai Darapur, Delhi. It is stated in the plaint that respondent No.1/plaintiff and respondent No.5/defendant No.5 formed a Joint Hindu family and were coloniser of the land in questions action for which was granted by the Standing Committee of the MCD in terms of the lay out plan submitted. The said sanction was granted vide Resolution dated 1.4.1959. It is further stated that the land was developed and building activities permitted vide Resolution dated 5.1.1962. Plots were carved out and sold. The purchasers of the plots formed an Association which is respondent No.4. It was alleged that the occupants of the plots colluded with the MCD for taking over various services ...

Tilak Raj Narula Vs. N.D.M.C.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 94(2001)DLT582; 2002(61)DRJ698

ORDERManmohan Sarin, J.Rule.1. With the consent of the parties writ petition is taken up for disposal. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking direction to the NDMC to construct a permanent fuel Depot at the site at Prithvi Raj Market, allotted in favor of the petitioner.2. Show cause notice was issued. NDMC filed its counter affidavit, wherein it accepted that NDMC had transferred allotment in favor of the petitioner from the name of his late father. NDMC however took the position that it was not obligatory on NDMC in terms of the license to construct any permanent fuel depot at the sit in dispute. Petitioner thereupon sought permission to construct the structure at his own cost so that he could carry on his business. In the event the petitioner constructed one office room and a toilet.3. Petitioner thereafter moved applications complaining of discrimination and submitting particulars of cases where either the NDMC or CPWD had permitted construction of more accommodation namel...

Sh. Virender Gupta Vs. Sh. Robinder Gupta and Others

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2002(61)DRJ246

ORDERSanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The appellant filed a suit for partition and rendition for a accounts against the respondents in respect of property bearing No. 87, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi. The parties are brothers and sister. The partition was claimed on the basis that a family settlement dated 14.9.1982 had been recorded and the decree for partition should be passed in terms thereof and respondents 1 and 2 should be directed to render accounts. The suit was contested. The suit was opposed by respondent No. 2 who set up a will dated 31.8.1982 of late father of the parties Sh. T.N. Gupta. Respondent No. 2 claimed to be the beneficiary under the said will and claimed to be the owner of the entire share of the deceased father Sh. T.N. Gupta which was to the extent of 64% share in the total property. The execution of the family settlement dated 14.9.1982 was not disputed though it was claimed that the same was not valid and binding as it was under under influence of the appellant and out of...

M/S Ganga Roller Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/S A.B. Industries (Baba B ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 94(2001)DLT450; 2002(61)DRJ537

J.D. Kapoor, J. 1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs.5,57,207.50 filed under Order 37 CPC. 2. The defendant has sought leave to contest mainly on the grounds: firstly that there was no privity of contract between the parties as to the sale of 'maida'; secondly, the defendant has not received any bills whatsoever from the plaintiff and; thirdly, that the goods were being supplied to the defendant through M/s.R.S. Agency and the amount against dishonoured cheques has already been paid by the defendant to M/s.R.S.Agencies on 8.6.1998. 3. According to the plaintiff, which is a Roller Flour Mill and is engaged in the production and sale of wheat products, defendant had approached for supply of 'maida' directly and not through M/s.R.S.Agencies. It is further averred that the defendant who manufactures breads, bas been purchasing 'maida' from the plaintiff on credit basis and the plaintiff has been supplying as per its orders and receiving payments of the outstanding bills from time to time. ...

Delhi Development Authority Vs. Hindustan Construction Corporation Eng ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 94(2001)DLT502; 2002(61)DRJ299

ORDERSanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The award of the work of construction of LIG Houses at Hastal by the appellant to the respondent vide agreement no. 19/EE/HD-9/86-87 gave rise to disputes resulting in proceedings under section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. Mr. H.R. Khanna, retired Judge of the Supreme Court of India was appointed the sole arbitrator by order dated 31.3.95 of the learned Single Judge and an Award dated 24.4.96 was published by the Learned Arbitrator.2. The learned arbitrator granted numerous opportunities to the appellant to file a reply but the appellant did not avail of the same. However, a communication dated 6.12.95 was sent to the learned arbitrator on behalf of the appellant stating that the claim was barred by time. Thus except to the extent of raising the plea of limitation, the proceedings before the learned arbitrator went almost uncontested.3. The award was filed in this court and on notice being served on the appellant of filing of the award, objections to t...

Pushpa Devi and anr. Vs. Sarti Devi and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 94(2001)DLT835; 2002(61)DRJ531

O.P. Dwivedi, J. 1. The plaintiff has filed this suit seeking declaration to the effect that the plaintiff is entitled to the entire enhanced compensation in respect of land of the deceased Mange Ram acquired by the Collector's Award No. 1448-86/97 and enhanced by the learned Additional District Judge in Land Acquisition case No. 34/94.2. Briefly stated, the facts as pleaded in the plaint are that Sh. Mange Ram, the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiff owned agricultural land in village Tikri Khurd, Delhi, About 75 bigha of his land was acquired by the Government of India in the year 1986-87 in respect of which Mange Ram was awarded compensation by the Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi. A reference for enhancement was made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act) and the compensation was enhanced by Mr. S.M. Aggarwal, learned Additional District Judge to the tune of Rs. 1,08,24971.82. The said amount of compensation was apportioned equally between the ...

Madan Lal Vaid Vs. Nand Kumar Walia and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 96(2002)DLT119; 2002(61)DRJ449

O.P. Dwivedi, J. 1. By this order I propose to dispose of application No. 7494/1999 under Order VII Rule 11 CPC read with Section 151 CPC filed by the defendants for rejecting the suit of the plaintiff for want of cause of action.2. Briefly stated, the facts in the background are as under:-3. This suit has been filed by Mr. Madan Lal Vaid against his son and daughter-in-law who are defendants 1 and 2 respectively, seeking decree for possession, declaration and permanent injunction in respect of half portion of property bearing No. 9/6075, Kashyap Marg (Behind Police Station) Gandhi Nagar, Delhi measuring 85 sq.yds and also the decree of declaration to the effect that power of attorney dated 5.10.1994 and other documents namely will dated 13.2.1995 executed by plaintiff in favor of the defendants 1 and 2 is null and void as these have been cancelled by Deed of Cancellation of General Power of Attorney dated 26th July, 1995. It ie pleaded in the plaint that the plaintiff is the owner of ...

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. R.J. Wood and Co. (P) Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

1. This appeal, preferred by the Revenue, is directed against CWT(A) is order dt. 30th Oct., 1995, relating to the asst. yr. 1984-85 by which penalty of Rs. 7,87,815 imposed by the AO under Section 18(1)(c) of the WT Act, 1957, was deleted.2. Relevant facts as noted by the AO are that assessee filed return for asst. yr. 1984-85 showing value of building at 12/4, Milestone, Mathura Road, Faridabad at Rs. 8,52,321 and assessment was completed on 29th Aug., 1985, in which value of the Faridabad property was assessed at Rs. 24 lacs. The assessment order was set aside by the CWT(A) vide order, dt. 23rd Dec., 1986, and in subsequent proceedings the AO valued the property of Faridabad at Rs. 75,89,000. The CWT(A) reduced the valuation thereof to Rs. 64,49,874. While framing, the fresh assessment order the AO also initiated penalty proceedings under Section 18(1)(c) on account of addition in respect of Faridabad property and Bombay property. The assessee submitted before the AO that assessee ...

Smt. Inderjit Kaur and Others Vs. State of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2002CriLJ505; 94(2001)DLT584; I(2002)DMC67; 2001(60)DRJ791

ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J. 1. This revision petition u/s. 397/401 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') is directed against the order dated 28th September, 1998 passed by the court of Sh. Naipal Singh, Addl. Session Judge, Delhi holding that prima facie case u/ss. 304B/406/34 IPC is made out against the petitioner in the case FIR No. 232/1996 P.S. Shalimar Bagh. 2. Prosecution allegations in brief are: that on 8th October, 1995 Smt. Ritu was married to Gurvinder Singh (petitioner No. 3). She died on 18th April, 1996 in her in-laws house on account of burn injuries leaving behind a suicide note. On the same day statement of Pritam Lal father of the deceased was recorded by the SDM. He stated that at the time of marriage of her daughter, he spent enough money and had given gold ornaments, scooter, T.V., Cooler, furniture to her daughter; her in-laws were not happy and she was taunted and harassed by her in-laws but she continued to bear the cruelties. Efforts made to reconcil...

Charanjeet Vs. Dda and Another

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 94(2001)DLT334; 2002(61)DRJ20

ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J.1. This petition under Sections 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.'), is directed against the judgment and order dated 19th December, 1996 passed by the Court of Ms. I.K. Kochhar, Addl. Sessions Judge, New Delhi, dismissing the appeal of the petitioner, upholding his conviction under Section 29(2) of the Delhi Development Act (for short, 'DD Act') and the sentence of fine of Rs. 4,000/-, in default of payment of fine SI for 30 days.2. Facts in brief are: on 8.3.1994, P.K. Thapliyal, junior engineer (surveyor), inspected the premises No. F-77, Jagat Puri, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the premises'), and found a shop under the name and style of M/s. Sangam Sanitary Store, functioning on the ground floor; five persons were working there at the time of inspection. The premises under the Master Plan and Zonal Development Plan No. E-8, could only be used for residential purposes. The report prepared at the spot along with the other...