Delhi Court March 2005 Judgments

Hind Samachar Limited and ors. Vs. Indian Newspaper Society and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 119(2005)DLT570; 2005(81)DRJ452

Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. Present order disposes of I.A.6084/02 seeking to restrain defendant No. 1 from preparing and circulating MRV-3 and/or any other such document and subsequent MRVs without the plaintiff's publication 'Punjab Kesari-Delhi'. Mandatory injunction is also prayed for to be issued to defendant No. 1 to include the name of 'Punjab Kesari-Delhi' in its MRV for the month of March 2002 and onward on the basis of statement submitted by the plaintiffs.2. Plaintiff No. 1, Hind Samachar Ltd is a company incorporated under the Companies Act having its registered office at Hind Samachar Building, Civil Lines, Jallandhar, Punjab. It has a branch office at Delhi at premises bearing municipal No. 2, Printing Press Complex, Wazirpur DTC Depot, Delhi. Plaintiffs 2 and 3 are the Directors of plaintiff No. 1. Plaintiff No. 3 also claims to be a shareholder of plaintiff No. 1. Defendant No. 1 is a society registered under Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1957. Inter alia, objects of defe...

Ram NaraIn Mishra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 119(2005)DLT600

B.C. Patel, C.J.1. Rule D.B.2. At the request of learned counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal.3. The public interest petition had to be filed in view of the internal disputes between the Postal Department and the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, which has resulted in revenue stamps disappearing from the market.4. In terms of the impugned order dated 28.02.2005, the Department of Posts, withdrew the facility of sale of revenue stamps through post offices w.e.f. 01.03.2005 due to non-receipt of commission on account of sale of revenue stamps from Delhi Treasury (Govt. of NCT of Delhi). Thus, no stamps have been made available causing grave inconvenience to public at large.5. It has to be appreciated that revenue stamps have to be affixed for the receipts and other purposes and commercial transactions are being affected on account of non-availability of revenue stamps.6. Learned counsel for the respondents state that a fresh order has now ...

Nzph Railway Employees Coop. G.H. Socy. Ltd. Vs. Delhi Vidyut Board

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR2005Delhi289; 118(2005)DLT732

Gita Mittal, J.1. In this writ petition a cooperative group housing society has sought directions to the respondent to provide individual meters and permanent electricity connection to members of the petitioner society.2. The petitioner is a registered cooperative group housing society which was registered in 1977. The very name itself shows that the petitioner society is largely composed of physically handicapped employees of the railway. According to the averments in the writ petition, 60% of the members of the society are physically handicapped persons who belong to class III and class IV of the Northern Zone Railways.3. It appears that the petitioner society had constructed flats at Geeta Colony near Shastri Nagar. Apart from the petitioner society, there were several other societies in the neighborhood including the KAYMES Cooperative Group Housing Society, SANMANYA CGHS Taj Sartaj CGHS and the Wakf Board which had also raised construction in the neighborhood. After construction o...

Sh. Sanjiv Lamba and anr. Vs. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 118(2005)DLT763; 2005(81)DRJ561

Gita Mittal, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking the following prayer:-'(i) to issue a Writ of Certiorari, quashing the order/action of the Respondents by which Respondent no. 1 has illegally trespassed the Land/Private Property bearing Khasra No's. 830/756/419, situated at Bagachhi Peer Ji, Adil Shahi Garden Land, Sabzi Mandi, Delhi admeasuring 1 Bigha and 13 bids was ie.1380 sq. Mts.(ii) to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents for payment of compensation towards usage and occupation charges amounting to Rs. 8,10,000/- being the rent of the aforesaid property for the period 1.12.2000 to 31.08.2004 @ Rs. 18,000/- Per Month along with interest @ 18% p.a. to the Petitioners;(iii) to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents for payment to the Petitioners compensation towards damages caused by them to the aforesaid property of the Petitioners amounting to Rs. 5,00,000/-;(iv) to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents for paym...

Raj Kumar Lohmorh Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi Through the Secretary (Ser ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 118(2005)DLT533; 2006(1)SLJ239(Delhi)

Manmohan Sarin, J.1. Petitioner-Raj Kumar Lohmorh has filed this writ petition, seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 7th October, 2002, (Annexure P-1) of Deputy Secretary (Services) of Government of NCT. By the impugned order, petitioner was notified that his request for appointment on compassionate grounds had been considered by the Screening Committee, but could not be recommended, due to shortage of vacancies.2. Petitioner is the son of late Shri Than Singh Lohmorh, who was working as Drawing Teacher in the Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School under the Director of Education. He had been employed on 22nd August, 1974 and died while in harness on 16th September, 1998. Late Than Singh Lohmorh left behind the petitioner, his widow, Kamla and two other daughters and two sons all between the age of 23 to 29 years. Petitioner is 31 years old married and has two children. Petition does not give any particulars about the family circumstances of the deceased's fam...

Sh. Jagat Singh and ors. Vs. Dsidc Ltd. and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 118(2005)DLT546

Gita Mittal, J.1. The present writ petition impugns the action of the respondents in rejecting applications of four of the sons of Sh. Mithan Lal whose land was acquired for individual shops on the ground that as per the scheme for allotment of shops to persons whose land was acquired, the expression 'Displaced Family' would include one member of the family of the 'Recorded owner' only and that Mithan Lal was the only 'recorded owner' of the land acquired whereas the petitioners were only his representatives and entitle to shares in the compensation awarded to Mithan Lal.2. The undisputed facts giving rise to the petition are that one Sh. Mithan Lal was the owner of a 14th share in land at measuring 67 Bighas 7 bids was in village Bhorgarh, Delhi. From the documents placed on record by the petitioner, it is evident that this land was notified for acquisition under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1989 in the year 1963. The award with regard to this land came to be made vide award...

Brahampal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 124(2005)DLT35

Gita Mittal, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against the Union of India to the defense Secretary and Joint Secretary of the Ministry of defense who have been arrayed as respondents no. 1 and 2 and against Col. S.K. Jha, the Chief Security Officer of the H-Block of the Ministry. The petitioner has sought the following prayers in the petition:-'(i) That appropriate writ/direction(s)/orders be issued to the Respondent to allow the petitioner to enter the building namely Engineers Army Head Quarters, Kashmir House Rajaji Marg, New Delhi, to enable him to carry on his business or running the Fruit shop in this building by giving him gate pass/entry permit in the building.(ii) The appropriate writ/orders/directions may kindly be issued to the Respondent to allocate alternate shops/stalls to the petitioner at any available place in their jurisdiction in place of the stall occupied by the petitioner in the building namely Engineers Army Head Quarters, Kashmir House Rajaji Marg, New Delh...

Citicorp Maruti Finance Ltd. Vs. Vijayalaxmi

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President: 1. Vide impugned order dated 22.12.2003 passed by the District Forum the appellant has been directed to pay Rs. 1,50,000/- with interest @ 9% towards the price of the vehicle financed by the appellant on account of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. Feeling aggrieved the appellant has directed this appeal. 2. Facts giving rise to this appeal are in brief like this. 3. The appellant is a finance company mainly engaged in the business of financing motor cars and other vehicles. The respondent obtained a loan of Rs. 1,82,396/- in May, 2000 towards the purchase of Maruti Omni. The total loan including the interest came to be Rs. 2,71,636/- which was payable in equal monthly instalment (EMI) of Rs. 4,604/-. From May, 2000 to January, 2003 all the instalments were paid. However, in the month of April, 2003, the husband of the respondent met with an accident and payment of subsequent instalments was delayed. On the request of the respondent for one time s...

Ceat Tyres Vs. Director, Enforcement Directorate

Court: Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

1. The following order of the Appellate Tribunal has been delivered by Shri O.P. Nahar, Chairperson. This appeal is filed against adjudication order No. SDE/SKP/111/52/2003 dated 17-7-2003 passed by Special Director, Enforcement Directorate imposing a penalty of Rs. 3,15,00,000 against the appellant for contravention of provisions of sections 8(3) and 8(4) of FERA, 1973 read with paras 7A, 20(i) of the ECM, 1995 read with sections 49(3) and 49(4) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 for the reasons that appellant failed to prove that goods were imported against two remittances of foreign exchange. 2. Learned Counsel, Shri R. Parthasarathy, argued that SCN was not served on the appellant because of change of address. The non-intimation cannot be faulted against the appellant because there can be no suspicion/ doubt that these adjudication proceedings are going to be started when the appellant has duly imported the goods against two remittances of foreign exchange. Moreover the a...

Metaplast Exim (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Cus.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2005)(184)ELT87TriDel

1. The appellant imported two consignments of glass fibre (woven rovings) at Kandla in November 1998. It sought assessment of the goods at the purchase price US $ 550 PMT. The Customs authorities considered this value to be low, and under the impugned order, increased the value to US $ 950 PMT for the purposes of assessment to duty. The appellant's claim was that the consignments were stock lots of fibre glass and the prices indicated in the invoices were the actual transaction values.The reasons given in the impugned order for enhancement of the assessable value are that the appellant itself has stated to Customs authorities that there were imports of the same goods by others at a price of about US $ 910 PMT. The order also noted that the appellant itself had imported another consignment at a value US $ 915 PMT.2. The contention of the appellant is that the consignments under import cannot be compared with the other imports, whether by the appellant itself or by others, for the reaso...