Delhi Court July 2004 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.
R.P.S. Yadav Vs. State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-05-2004
Reported in: 112(2004)DLT452; 2004(75)DRJ449; 2005(3)SLJ271(Delhi)
Manmohan Sarin, J. 1. Rule.With the consent of the parties, writ petition is taken up for disposal.2. Petitioner, by this writ petition, seeks a direction to the respondents to grant his service pension as per his representation of 10th September, 1997 after declaring that he retired from the service on 31st March, 1997. Further, direction is sought to the bank to grant pension w.e.f. 1st April, 1997. 3. Counsel for the petitioner and respondent have been heard. This is an unfortunate case where the petitioner was disabled and sought retirement.4. Petitioner, R.P.S.Yadav, was employed with State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur. The present writ petition has been filed through petitioner's wife, Smt.Santra Yadav. Petitioner suffered brain hemorrhageon 27th February, 1994 and was hospitalised. Petitioner suffered disability of 62 per cent and was unable to resume normal activities. As a result, petitioner on 19th October, 1995, wrote to the Bank (Annexure P-7), praying that his resignation be...
E.i.H. Limited Vs. National Capital Territory of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-05-2004
Reported in: 113(2004)DLT488; 2004(76)DRJ74; [2005(104)FLR8]; (2004)IIILLJ1123Del
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. The three captioned petitions have a common back drop and hence are being decided together.2. Prayers made in W.P(C) No.4361/1997 filed by the management are as under:-'(i) issue appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari or mandamus quashing the impugned award dated 13.6.97 (Annexure P-1) of Industrial Tribunal-II, Tis Hazari, Delhi.(ii) issue appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari or mandamus quashing the impugned terms of reference dated 17.11.95 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Secretary (Labour), Government of NCT Delhi.(iii) issue appropriate writ, order or direction to Industrial Tribunal-II, Tis Hazari, Delhi for forwarding the file relating to the impugned award dated 17.11.1995 in ID No. 38/95, 2/96.(iv) Issue appropriate writ, order or direction to Secretary (Labour, Government of NCT Delhi to forward the file on the basis of which terms of reference No. F.24 (3383)/95-Lab/13628388 dated 17.1...
R.P. Chhabra Vs. Punjab National Bank
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-05-2004
Reported in: (2004)IIILLJ560Del; 2005(2)SLJ129(Delhi)
Pradeep Nandrajog, J. 1. Petitioner challenges the order dated 7.3.1988 passed by the disciplinary authority imposing the penalty of removal from service which shall not be a disqualification for future employment as well as the decision dated 3.1.1989 of the Appellate Authority i.e. the Board of Directors of the respondent bank, rejecting the appeal filed by the petitioner as communicated to the petitioner under cover of letter dated 13.1.1989.2. Petitioner was posted as Zonal Manager, London of the respondent bank from 12th December, 1984 up to end of March, 1985. Pertaining to his functioning as the Zonal Manager, London, under cover of memorandum dated 8.4.1986, a charge-sheet was served upon the petitioner. The said charge-sheet listed the following charges against the petitioner:-'ARTICLE OF CHARGE AGAINST SHRI R.P. CHHABRA, DY.GENERAL MANAGER, HO NEW DELHI PREV.ZONAL MANAGER, U.K. Shri RP Chhabra while working as Zonal Manager, London committed following irregularities: i) Allow...
Sh. S.D. Gupta Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-05-2004
Reported in: 112(2004)DLT657; 2004(75)DRJ757; [2005(104)FLR4]; (2005)ILLJ51Del; 2005(3)SLJ18(Delhi)
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. Petitioner seeks quashing of the charge sheet dated 19.7.1995, the enquiry report dated 24.6.1996, order of the disciplinary authority dated 22.1.1998 imposing the penalty of dismissal from service which shall be a disqualification from future service and order of the Appellate Authority dated 9.12.1998 upholding the order of penalty imposed by the disciplinary authority. Petitioner also challenges the charge-sheet dated 20.7.1995 and the enquiry report dated 1.2.1997. Petitioner though laid a challenge to the charge- sheet dated 4.11.1994, enquiry report dated 10.7.1995 and the order of the disciplinary authority dated 5.9.1995 in the writ petition, did not press the same during argument. Arguments were thereforee restricted to the charge-sheet dated 19.7.1995, enquiry report pertaining to the said charge sheet and the penalty imposed there under. Challenge to the charge sheet dated 20.7.1995 was restricted only to one ground, namely, delay in issuance of the c...
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Memorial Foundation (Regd.) and anr. Vs. Union of In ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-05-2004
Reported in: 112(2004)DLT725; 2004(76)DRJ147; 2005(2)SLJ497(Delhi)
Pradeep Nandrajog, J. 1. Petitioners challenge the order dated 21.8.2003 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India as also the order dated 27.8.2003 issued by the Government of NCT Delhi to the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and all heads of department/local/autonomous bodies/PSUs under the Government of Delhi.2. Order dated 21.8.2003 reads as under:-U.14011/128/2001 Delhi, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRSGOVERNMENT OF INDIANew Delhi, the 21stAugust, 2003.To,Sh. B.V. SelvarajSecretary (Services)Government of NCT of DelhiNew Delhi.Sub: Reservation for Scheduled Caste for recruitment to civil posts under the Government of NCT of Delhi.Sir, I am directed to refer to the correspondence resting with the Govt. of NCT of Delhi (Services-III Department)'s letter No. F.19(10)/2001/S.III/2286 dated the 22nd August, 2001 regarding the subject mentioned above and to say that the instructions contained in the Ministry of Home Affairs O.M NO. 7/2/55/SCT dated the 14th October, ...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Presiding Officer Labour Court No. X a ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-05-2004
Reported in: 112(2004)DLT454; 2004(75)DRJ472; (2004)IIILLJ700Del; 2005(3)SLJ273(Delhi)
Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. This is an application filed by the workman praying for a direction to the petitioner to deposit the balance amount in terms of the order of this Court dated July 21, 2003.2. An application was filed by the respondent No.3 under Section 17B contending, inter alia, that the workman has not been employed by the management even in spite of the award passed by the Labour Court. The said application was considered by this Court and by order dated July 21, 2003 this Court allowed the application. While allowing the said application, this Court noted the decision of the Supreme Court in Regional Authority, Dena Bank & Anr. v. Ghanshyam reported in JT 2001 (Supp) SC 229. After noticing the said judgment, this Court passed an order that the respondent No.3 would be paid the arrears of wages last drawn by him or the minimum wages, whichever is higher from the date of the award till date within four weeks from the date of the order and thereafter the wages would be continu...
Amar Singh Thukral, S/O Shri Joumphi Ram, Vs. Sandeep Chhatwal, S/O Sh ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-05-2004
Reported in: II(2004)ACC826; 2005ACJ1187; 112(2004)DLT478; 2004(75)DRJ553
Madan B. Lokur, J.1. The Appellants are aggrieved by an Award dated 12th September, 1988 passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) in Suit No. 97/1982.2. Smt. Shakuntala Devi died in an accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of a vehicle by Respondent No.1. The accident took place on 26th July, 1982 and she died the next day. At the time of her death, she was a housewife aged about 36 years. Her husband and children filed a claim petition seeking compensation under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (the Act).3. The learned MACT held Respondent No.1 guilty of rash and negligent driving and thereby causing the death of Smt. Shakuntala Devi. As regards the compensation to be awarded, the learned MACT relied upon Bhagwan Dass Bhatia vs. Anand Pal 1986 ACJ 879 wherein a housewife aged about 53-54 years died in an accident in September 1976. A learned Single Judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court estimated that her contribution to the household co...
Krishna Finhold Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Gupta and Co. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-05-2004
Reported in: 112(2004)DLT581; 2004(76)DRJ32
Vikramajit Sen, J. 1. The Plaintiff has filed a letter dated 2.7.1996 styled as a 'Loan Application' made it by Gupta & Co., Defendant No.1. Paragraph 3 of this letter which has been signed by Shri Ved Prakash Mittal states that the Applicant is a partnership firm. It also mentions the name of Shri Ved Parkash Mittal as the third partner of Gupta & Co. and Ved Parkash Mittal & Sons. as the fourth partner. In the Suit, however, only Sita Ram has been imp leaded as Defendant No. 2 and not the other partners. A perusal of this document also discloses that the address of Shri Ved Parkash Mittal is WZ-258/3, Nangal Ray, New Delhi-110046 which is the registered office of the Plaintiff. This is clear from a reading of the first document which purports to be a certified copy of the Resolution of the Plaintiff company.2. In the application for Leave to Defend, it has inter alias been pleaded as follows:'That the present suit is even otherwise an abuse of the process of this Hon'ble Court, since...
Commissioner of Customs, Icd Vs. Cegat
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-05-2004
Reported in: 2005(179)ELT394(Del)
B.C. Patel, C.J.1. These writ petitions are taken up together. The petition (CW 6712/2002) filed by the Commissioner Customs, New Delhi is taken up first. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 26-9-2002 passed by the respondent No. 1 whereby a direction was given to the petitioner to refund the amount, received by way of encashment of bank guarantee on the alleged ground that the refund has been directed without following the procedure as prescribed under Section 27(3) of the Customs Act, 1962.2. The facts are taken from the impugned order made by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, copy of which is produced on record at page 25 of the paper book. By the order dated 4-9-2002 , the Tribunal disposed of the appeal which was filed against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). It is required to be noted that the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal on the ground that the appeal was maintainable. By an order dated 31-5-20...
Studio Printall (New Delhi) Pvt. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-02-2004
Reported in: (2004)(172)ELT402TriDel
1. Both the appeals are directed against the same adjudication order.Cause of Action is also the same. Accordingly, they were taken up together for consideration and are disposed of under this common order.2. Under the impugned order, a duty demand of over Rs. 85 lakhs along with penalties has been confirmed on the first appellant, who has been held to be a manufacturer. Second appellant is the Director of the first appellant and a penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs has been imposed on him.The period of duty demand is 1996-97 to 1999-2000 and the duty demand has been confirmed by taking resort to the extended period provided under proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act.3. The duty demand is in respect of stickers, dispensers, leather tags, banners and illuminating sign boards produced by the appellants during the course of their work as an advertisement material producer.4. With regard to the stickers the submission of the appellants is that the only activity carried out by them is pri...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »