Delhi Court September 2002 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.
Ram Kishan Dass (Deceased) Thr. Lrs. Vs. Banarsi Lal Suri and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: 102(2003)DLT632
R.C. Chopra, J.1. By this application under Sections 151, 152 and 153 of the Code of Civil Procedure, defendants Nos. 3 and 4 pray that the preliminary decree dated 20.8.1981 passed by this Court be modified and their shares be redefined. The defendants/applicants plead that the preliminary decree was passed on the basis of a Will of Late Shri Mela Ram alleged to have been executed on 18.9.1978, but now it has come to their notice that deceased Shri Mela Ram had made an earlier registered Will dated 26.12.1974 according to which they are entitled to additional shares in the suit property.2. The application is opposed on behalf of defendants Nos. 2 and 5, mainly on the ground that the preliminary decree dated 20.8.1981 was passed on the basis of the Will dated 18.9.1978 without any objection or demur on behalf of the applicants and as such, at this belated stage, the applicants are estopped from denying the genuineness or the existence of the said Will. It is contended that even if the ...
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and ors. Vs. Shri Sadhu Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: (2004)ILLJ746Del
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. The petitioners herein is an autonomous body. It is financed by the Ministry of Human Resources Development; Department of Education. It runs a chain of institutions known as Kendriya Vidyalayas all over the country. Such institutions have been set up to cater to the educational needs of the children of Central Government employees including defense personnel. The Kendriya Vidyalayas are situated in civil and defense sectors where there exists a large concentration of transferable Central Government employees including defense personnel. Such Kendriya Vidyalayas also function under the auspices of public sector undertakings which are fully financed by them.2. The respondents herein are daily wage employees employed in between 16th July 1974 and 22nd September 1983. They have been employed for the purpose of assisting the kitchen staff of Kendriya Vidyalayas at Delhi Cantt. The kitchen staff are provided free meals and lodging.3. The hostel affairs are managed by the ...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Rajbir Singh and Sadh Ram
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: (2003)ILLJ865Del
S.N. Sinha, C.J.1. These appeals involving similar questions of law and fact were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed ofby this common judgment.2. The fact of the matter, however, is being noticed from LPA 656/2002.The respondents herein were employees of the appellant herein. They were prematurely retired on the ground of medical invalidation. Questioning the said orders, writ petitions were filed by the respondents praying that they be reinstated in service with full wages.3. The respondent-Rajbir Singh met with an accident on 12.8.1996 as a consequence whereof his left femur bone was fractured. He remained under treatment till 16.2.1997. He was advised rest by his doctors for three months initially on 24.1.1997 and thereafter again so advised on 27.7.1997 and 15.1.1998. The respondent allegedly filed a fitness certificate issued by Dua Nursing Home Sonepat (Haryana) on 26.5.1998. However, he was directed to appear before a medical board, which declared him medically...
Uttam Parkash Bansal and ors. Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: 100(2002)DLT497
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. This writ petition is directed against a judgment and order dated 19th November, 1983 passed by Mr. S.P. Singh, Additional District Judge/ Appellate Authority under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as the 'said Act') in P.P. A. No.(s) 21/82 and 22/82, whereby and where under the appeals filed by the writ petitioners herein purported to be in terms of Section 9 thereof arising out of an order dated 8th September, 1980 passed by Estate Officer, Life Insurance Corporation of India, in case No. 13/77 were dismissed.2. The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute.A mezzanine floor of the premises in question was left out by M/s. Tropical Insurance Company in favor of one Uttam Prakash Bansal in the year 1950. He entered into a partnership with one Deen Dayal Kaushik. In the premises in question office of the firm was opened.3. According to the petitioners herein rent used to be paid by bo...
Than Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)SLJ440(Delhi)
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition is aggrieved by an order dated 3rd March 1998 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, in OA No. 2821/1997 as also the order dated 16th April 1998 passed in RA No. 59/98 whereby and whereunder his Original Application questioning an order of his dismissal from service as also the review thereof were dismissed.2. The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute.In relation to certain incidents which had taken place in March 1981, a charge-sheet was issued against the petitioner on 30th December 1993. According to the petitioner, in relation to the alleged lapse on pat of the petitioner, he was called upon to submit his Explanationn on 18th November 1981. He was again called upon to submit his Explanationn with regard thereto on 15th April 1982. He requested for inspection of records on 23rd April 1982 but thereafter no action had been taken. The petitioner had been promoted to the post of Assistant E...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Rajbir Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: 100(2002)DLT111; 2003(2)SLJ102(Delhi)
S.B. Sinha, C.J.1. These appeals involving similar questions of law and fact were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The fact of the matter, however, is being noticed from LPA 656/2002.The respondents herein were employees of the appellant herein. They were prematurely retired on the ground of medical invalidation. Questioning the said orders, writ petitions were filed by the respondents praying that they be reinstated in service with full wages,3. The respondent-Rajbir Singh met with an accident on 12.8.1996 as a consequence whereof his left femur bone was fractured. He remained under treatment till 16.2.1997. He was advised rest by his doctors for three months initially on 24.1.1997 and thereafter again so advised on 27.7.1997 and 15.1.1998. The respondent allegedly filed a fitness certificate issued by Dua Nursing House, Sonepat (Haryana) on 26.5.1998. However, he was directed to appear before a Medical Board, which declared him medica...
Foodworld Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: 110(2004)DLT772; 2004(77)DRJ369
S.B. Sinha, C.J. 1. The petitioner, a partnership firm, inter alia, carries on the business of providing catering services to the Railways. Respondents No. 2 and 3 awarded a contract for catering services to the petitioner on the Nizamuddin - Secunderabad -- Nizamuddin Rajdhani Express bearing train No. 2437 and 2438 w.e.f. 26th January 1998. The agreement was entered into by and between the petitioner and the said respondents on or about 16th March 1998. The said agreement came into force w.e.f. 26th January 1998 and was to remain in force for a period of five years. The said train was a weekly one. On and from 1st April 1998, the frequency thereof was made bi-weekly where for also the catering contract of catering was awarded to the petitioner. In or about September 1998, the Railway Administration took a decision to extend one of the trips of the said train up to Bangalore. The catering contract for the extended trip also was given to the petitioner on 3rd November 1998.2. It is not...
Mohar Singh @ Pappu Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: 103(2003)DLT421
O.P. Dwivedi, J. 1. By this order, I propose to dispose of two connected appeals arising from the judgment of conviction dated 29th January, 1999 and order of sentence dated 30th January, 1999 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi thereby convicting the appellants under Section 363/34, IPC and sentenced them to undergo RI for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for two months in Sessions Case No. 76/1995 under Sections 363/366/376, IPC Police Station, Kalkaji, FIR No. 415/92.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 31st July, 1992 complainant Rakesh lodged a report to the effect that his daughter, namely Geeta aged 13 years is missing from his house since 29th July, 1992 evening. She had also taken away her clothes and Rs. 400/-. In the said report he expressed suspicion on the appellant Mohar Singh @ Pappu who resides in his neighborhood. On this report, a case under Sections 363/366, IPC was got ...
Bharat Commerce and Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: (2003)181CTR(Del)262
ORDER1. The petitioner in this writ petition has inter alias prayed for the following reliefs :(a) Writ in the nature of certiorari/mandamus quashing the notice of demand dt. 6th July, 1987, issued by the ITO, Central Circle XIX, New Delhi (Respondent No. 4), charging interest of Rs. 6,19,015 included in the sum of Rs. 15,68,669 and/or mandamus that the notice be suitably amended to exclude charge of interest from 3rd July, 1982, to 1st Aug., 1987.(b) A writ in the nature of certiorari/mandamus quashing the Circular No. 334 dt. 3rd April, 1982, issued by the CBDT (Respondent No. 2) as/is ultra virus the provisions of Section 220(2) of the IT Act, 1961 and hence has to be ignored and not treated as binding in computation of interest under Section 220(2) of the Act.2. The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute which can be seen from the following chronological events :29th June, 1979--Return for the asst. yr. 1979-80 declaring income of Rs. 1,38,61,120 was filed.3rd, June, 1982--Asse...
S.C. Agnihotri and anr. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: [2003]259ITR24(Delhi)
O.P. Dwivedi, J. 1. The Income-tax Department had filed a criminal complaint under Section 276C of Income-tax Act, 1961. The petitioners were summoned. The petitioners appeared in response to summons and they were granted exemption from personal appearance. However, on the next date January 15, 2002, the petitioners who are residents of Faridabad did not come to the court as they had already been granted exemption. Counsel Mr. K. R. Manjani, advocate, through whom the petitioners were exempted from appearance also did not reach the court in time so the exemption was withdrawn and the case was listed for April 1, 2002, for pre-charge evidence. Later on the petitioners moved another application claiming exemption from personal appearance. That application was supported by the affidavits of counsel for the petitioner wherein it was averred that Mr. K. R. Manjani, advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner, could not reach the court in time as he was busy in the High Court but his junior...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »