Delhi Court September 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.
CamlIn Private Limited Vs. National Pencil Industries
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-2001
Reported in: 96(2002)DLT8
Devinder Gupta, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the composite order passed on 7.11.1985 by the learned Single Judge rejecting the plaint on the ground that the plaint do not disclose cause of action against the defendant and simultaneously dismissing the application filed by plaintiff/appellant under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC seeking temporary injunction against the defendant.2. On 17.4.1985 plaintiff filed suit against the defendant claiming the following reliefs:-(i) An order for permanent injunction restraining the defendant through its partners or proprietor as the case may be, their servants, agents, from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in ELORA and CAPTAIN pencils and cartons or any other pencil and/or carton as are identical to and/or deceptively similar with the plaintiff's FLORA pencil and the carton pertaining thereto respectively and/or from reproducing the floral design of the plaintiff on CAPTAIN pencil ca...
Anand Niketan Co-operative Group Housing Society Ltd. and anr. Vs. the ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-2001
Reported in: 94(2001)DLT899; 2002(62)DRJ257
Manmohan Sarin, J.Rule.1. With the consent of the parties, writ petition is taken up for disposal.2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to assail the order dated 14.2.2000, passed by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies in case No. RCS/126/99/118-124. By this order, Registrar had taken cognizance under Section 60 and referred the disputes for arbitration under Section 61 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act 1972, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to Mr. D.S. Nijjer, Joint Registrar.It may be noted that prior to invocation of arbitration, respondents 1 and 2 had instituted a civil suit for permanent injunction in the civil court. It appears that petitioners herein took objection to the maintainability of the suit on the ground that since Section 60 of the Act provides for arbitration in a dispute between the member and the Society, the civil suit was not maintainable. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, in view of the objection withdrew the civil suit. It may be noted that ...
Pyare Vs. the Financial Commissioner and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2001
Reported in: 94(2001)DLT348; 2001(60)DRJ695
ORDERAnil Dev Singh, J. 1. This is a writ petition whereby the petitioner seeks quashing of the order of the Financial Commissioner dated July 3, 1989, the order of the Additional Collector dated June 2, 1989 and the order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate dated February 11, 1987. The facts giving rise to the petition are as follows:-2. The petitioner claims to be in cultivatory possession of land measuring 3 bighas 1 bids was comprised in Khasra No. 59/11 situated in the revenue estate of village Pooth Kalan, Delhi, for about two decades. As a consequence of being in possession of the land, he asserts to be a Bhumidhar of the land. On September 17, 1981 the petitioner filed an application under section 85 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 in the court of the Revenue Assistant for being declared as Bhumidhar of the land. While the proceedings before the Revenue Assistant were pending, the land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as per the following details:-Date of iss...
Pawan Mehta Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1933; 2001(60)DRJ727; 2002(79)ECC430
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. The appellants were held guilty under Sections 18 and 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act (for short 'the Act'), in the case FIR No. 137/89, P.S. Karol Bagh, and sentenced to imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 1.0 lac, in default, further imprisonment for one year each, by the judgment and order dated 9th November, 2000, passed by the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi. Appeals against the said judgment and order have already been admitted. This order will dispose of their applications under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence during pendency of the appeal and for being released on bail.2. Facts necessary for the disposal of these applications are: on 17th April, 1989 at about 11.45 a.m. secret information was received at P.S. Karol Bagh that a white colour maruti car would be passing through the area with huge quantity of opium. The information (Ex. PW-7/A) was reduced into writing and raiding party was put in position. Marut...
Daya Chand Yadav Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2001
Reported in: [2002(92)FLR1001]
ORDERVikramajit Sen, J.1. The issue that a teacher or an employee of an educational institution which has been taken over by the Municipality is entitled to calculation of seniority from the date of initial appointment and not from the date on which the School was municipalized is no longer rest integra. Very recently, by a judgment dated August 21, 2001 in C.W.P. No. 4428/2000 entitled Dhan Singh v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and others, Hon'ble Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J., after considering all the previous decisions on the issue, had quashed the Respondents decision to calculate the seniority from the date of takeover. I am in respectful agreement with these views. It appears that the writ petitioners before Hon'ble Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J. also belonged to the same School as the Petitioner herein. The present petition is on all fours with Dhan Singh's case (supra). Accordingly the petition is allowed and the action of the Respondents in denying promotion to the Petitioner on the...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Zile Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ654; 94(2001)DLT556
Madan B. Lokur, J. 1. These two appeals are directed against a common judgment and order dated 16th February, 2000 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in FAO No. 357 of 1996 and Fao No.331 of 1996. 2. Jagdev Singh was a conductor with the Delhi Transport Corporation (for short DTC). He was standing near the 'paidan' or foot-board on the rear of a bus. When the bus took a sharp turn, he was thrown out and came under the wheels of a truck behind the bus, and was crushed to death. His widow and children applied to the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short MACT) for the grant of compensation. The MACT framed the following issues:- '1. Whether the death of Jagdev Singh resulted from the accident as alleged by the petitioner arising out of the use of truck No.DNL 1805 & DTC bus N. DHP-3781 on 24.489 at 6.35 P.M. on G.T. Road near crossing of Palla Road, Delhi. 2. Whether the petitioners are the LRs of the deceased late Jagdev Singh? 3. Whether the deceased suffered fatal inj...
Dimple Singla Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2001
Reported in: 94(2001)DLT917; 2002(63)DRJ216
Anil Dev Singh, J. 1. Admit.This is a Letters Patent Appeal directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated August 24, 2001 passed in C.W.P. No. 4205/2001. By that order the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition of the appellant holding that there was no infirmity in the action taken by the respondents in transferring the appellant to Pune. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows :-The appellant is married to an advocate who practice law at Chandigarh. She has a child of one and a half years. The appellant joined the Indian Army as a short service commissioned officer in the Judge Advocate General's Department on March 8, 1997. During the short span of four and a half years of her service career she is stated to have been transferred three times.2. On September 27,1999 the appellant was posted as Staff Captain (Legal) in the judge Advocate General's Department at New Delhi. After working against that post for a period of about less than two years, ...
Director General of Works, Cpwd, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi Vs. Regional ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2001
Reported in: 94(2001)DLT857
ORDERVikramajit Sen, J.1. By Orders dated 17th January, 1986 in the Writ Petition (Civil) Nos.59-60 & 563-70/1983 entitled Surinder Singh v. Engineer-in-Chief, C.P.W.D. & Others, the Respondent had been directed 'to pay to the petitioners and all other daily rated employees, to pay the same salary and allowances as are paid to regular and permanent employees with effect form the date when they were respectively employed.' It is contended on behalf of the Petitioners by the learned Additional Solicitor General that these dictions have been duly complied with and that on a proper appreciation of the said order, the 'salary and allowances' would not include Cycle Allowance, Uniform Allowance and Washing Allowance, and Increments all of which are payable to regular employees only. Reliance is placed o two decisions of the Apex Court viz State of Haryana Vs . Jasmer Singh & Others, : (1997)IILLJ667SC and State of Haryana Vs . Surinder Kumar and Others, : [1997]2SCR917 . In neither of these ...
Surjit Singh Vs. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2001
Reported in: 94(2001)DLT245; 2002(62)DRJ389
S.K. Mahajan, J.1. Rule. With the consent of the parties matter has been heard and is being disposed of finally.2. Petitioner is the subscriber of a telephone line bearing No. 3265301 installed at his business premises at 1195, Charhahat building, Jama Masjid, Delhi. Petitioner also had another telephone line bearing No. 5121187 installed at his residence at Rajouri Garden. Still another telephone line bearing No. 5416493 was provided in the name of the petitioner's wife at his residence. For non-payment of the dues in respect of the telephone lines installed at his residence, in his name and in the name of his wife, both the telephone lines were disconnected. It appears that there were certain arrears in respect of telephone line No. 3265301 installed at the business premises of the petitioner. For non-payment of the dues in respect of this telephone line, the telephone at the business premises of the petitioner was also disconnect. Petitioner applied for restoration of the telephone ...
Mukram and ors. Vs. the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-2001
Reported in: 95(2002)DLT382; 2002(61)DRJ345
Usha Mehra, J.1. Appellants were charged under Section 302/394/411/34 Indian Penal Code (in short IPC). The learned Add. Sessions Judge after considering the oral and the documentary evidence convicted these appellants under Section 302/394/34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302 IPC and also to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months and to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and Section 394 IPC and fine of Rs.1,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.2. The orders of conviction and sentence have been assailed by the appellants, inter alia, on the grounds that identify of the appellants were doubtful. Moreover on the basis of the disclosure statements the alleged recovered articles were never got identified. The alleged recovery was also not w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »