Delhi Court November 2008 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2008 Page 3 of about 102 results (0.011 seconds)Yogesh Tyagi Vs. Kela Devi
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 156(2009)DLT717
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. Appellant who was the plaintiff, had filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell, Ex.PW-1/1, stated to have been executed by the defendant i.e. the respondent in the appeal on 19.10.2004, agreeing to sell to him the property referred to in the agreement, for a total sale consideration of Rs. 16,50,000/- (Rupees Sixteen Lakhs Fifty Thousand only), out of which Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only), was stated to have been paid, as recorded in the agreement, as part sale consideration when Ex.PW-1/1 was executed. It was pleaded that the agreement recorded that the respondent would execute the sale deed by 15.2.2005 and that the appellant made an attempt twice to tender the balance sale consideration of Rs. 13,50,000/- on 24.2.2005 and 10.3.2005; receiving no response from the respondent when she did not even respond to a legal notice dated 24.3.2005, Ex.PW-1/3, the appellant had no option but to file the suit.2. First prayer made in the suit w...
Tag this Judgment!Chitra Goel and ors. Vs. Abdul Sattar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2009ACJ945
Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Mool Chand Garg, JJ.1. K.K. Goel died in a road accident on 26.11.1984. The appellants are the legal heirs who have been agitating their claim for compensation for the last 24 years.2. Late K.K. Goel was a passenger in a car being driven by one of his relations when the same was hit by a bus driven rashly, recklessly and negligently by respondent No. 1. D.T.C., respondent No. 3, is the owner of the bus while respondent No. 4 is the insurance company. The deceased at the time of his death left behind his parents, wife and three daughters. The father passed away during the pendency of the petition and the appellants before us are the wife and the three daughters who are now major. The deceased was aged 36 years at the time of his death.3. The deceased was a government servant and working as' an Inspector with the Textile Committee on a salary of Rs. 3,200 per month in addition to other benefits. The Tribunal took the dependency amount at Rs. 2,200 per month and app...
Tag this Judgment!Malarvizhi Elangovan Vs. Director of Estates and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 156(2009)DLT394
Vipin Sanghi, J.1. I am dealing with the aforesaid two petitions by this common judgment since the facts are more or less identical, except that the specific dates in the two cases are different. The appeals preferred by the petitioners in these two petitions under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Occupation of Unauthorized Occupants) Act ('The Act' for short) have been dismissed by the Ld. Additional District Judge by a common order impugned herein. For the present, I am narrating the relevant facts in W.P.(C) No. 19350/06 preferred by Malarvizhi Elangovan.2. The Directorate of Estates made an allotment of stall No. 4 DIZ Area, Baba Kharag Singh Marg, New Delhi in favour of one Mohd. Zaffar on licence basis on 5.8.1998. The said allotment was made after inviting a tender. The licence was valid for a period of three years. Clause 16 of the licence deed, being relevant is reproduced herein below:The allotment of the shop/stall is being made for a limited period of three years. The Gove...
Tag this Judgment!K.D. Sharma and ors. Vs. B.M. Dhaul, Chief Engineer (Retd.), Delhi Jal ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 155(2008)DLT263
ORDERShiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. In the present contempt petition the petitioners have submitted that despite assurances given in the Court in WP 4034-36/2004 4034-36/2004 dated 6.3.2006 that all broken sewer lines as set out in the report of Mr. B.M. Dhaul would be rectified by 31.5.2006 and it would be ensured that no sewage flows into storm water drain, the respondents failed to comply with the order and assurances given in the Court. Repeated representations and demand letter written by the petitioner after passing of the order had no effect. Petitioner has placed on record representations and letters written to the respondents on 25.8.06, 23.9.06, 13.10.06, 3.11.06, 13.3.07 and 21.8.07 addressed to Chief Engineer, respondent No. 1 pointing out that sewage and sullage was still flowing in the storm water drain. The petitioner contended that respondent No. 2 Mr. Arun Mathur, was squarely responsible for not discharging his duty of inspecting the sewage lines and to stop the flow of s...
Tag this Judgment!Director of Income-tax (Exemption) Vs. Japan Chamber of Commerce and I ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: (2009)221CTR(Del)145; [2009]308ITR76(Delhi); [2009]180TAXMAN104(Delhi)
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. The present appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act') impugns the order dated 25.04.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal whereby the Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) was directed to accord registration to the assessee society under Section 12A of the said Act.2. The appeal before the Tribunal was preferred by the assessee, being aggrieved by the order passed by the Director of Income Tax (Exemptions), refusing to grant registration to the assessee under Section 12A of the said Act.3. The assessee is the Japan Chamber of Commerce & Industry in India and has its office at No. 7, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. It is also registered with the Registrar of Societies under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The aims and objects of the society, as indicated in the Memorandum of Association of the society, are as under:1. To undertake, encourage, facilitate and promote the development of trade, indu...
Tag this Judgment!Sikka Associates Vs. Airports Authority of India
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2008(4)ARBLR593(Delhi)
Mukul Mudgal, J.1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant above-named being aggrieved from the judgment of the learned judge of this Court passed in OMP No. 179 of 2000 whereby the arbitral award dated 12th June, 2000 awarding an additional sum of Rs. 12,25,575/- in favour of the appellant as fees @ 4.5% on the cost of the project against the tender cost and also upon the amount of escalation charges payable to the architects and a further sum of Rs. 40,000/- as interest on the delayed payment of bill has been set aside.2. Briefly, the facts of the present case are:i) That the appellant had submitted its offer vide letter dated 5th January, 1989 relating to the work of 'providing consultancy services for the work of construction of New International Block, Domestic Departure/Arrival Block and associated work at Goa Airport'. It was accepted by the respondent vide letter dated 22nd February, 1989 at the remuneration payable to the appellant for such work at '4.5% of the exec...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Saraf Paper Mills Ltd (In Liquidation) Through Official Liquida ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [2009]148CompCas381(Delhi); 155(2008)DLT517; [2009]92SCL232(Delhi)
Vipin Sanghi, J.1. By this order I propose to dispose of CA No. 1185/2006 (preferred by M/s Indocap Pvt. Ltd. for enhancement of the bid price to Rs. 4.10 crores for the land and building), CA No. 1449/2006 (preferred by IDBI for disbursement of the amount lying with the Official Liquidator), CA No. 554/2007 (preferred by M/s Surya Finvest P. Ltd. for enhancement of the bid price to Rs. 4.50 crores for the land and building) and C.A. No. 698/2007 (preferred by Industrial Finance Corporation of India Ltd. [IFCI Ltd.]) to set aside the auction dated 04.11.2004 in favour of Gagan Educational Society in respect of the land and building of the company in liquidation admeasuring 35 acres and having built up area of about 79,658.75 sq.ft situated at M.I.A Extension, Delhi-Alwar Road, Alwar (Rajasthan). Brief facts leading to the filing of these applications are as follows:2. M/s Saraf Paper Mills Ltd. was ordered to be wound up by this Court on 20.05.1994 in C.P. No. 201/1990 and the official...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Vimla Mehra W/O Sh. K.S. Mehra D/O Sh. T.C. Sohal Vs. Shri K.S. M ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 158(2009)DLT136
V.B. Gupta, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant(wife) under Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short as 'Act') against the impugned judgment and decree dated 15th October, 2007 passed by Sh. Gurdeep Singh, Addl. District Sessions Judge, Delhi.2. Vide the impugned judgment, the trial court has decreed the petition under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Act for divorce filed on behalf of the respondent-husband.3. The brief facts of this case are that parties were married according to Arya Samaj rites and ceremonies on 12th November, 1978 at Delhi. The marriage was also registered. Out of the wedlock, two sons were born, namely, Kanak Mehra on 2nd February, 1981 and Vaibhav Mehra on 27th November, 1982.4. After solemnization of the marriage between the parties, the appellant has treated the respondent with cruelty as under:(A) The respondent is an IAS Officer of 1978 Batch (U.P. Cadre) and at the time of filing of petition was posted as Joint Secretary to the Government of ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Uppal Hotels Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: [2009]178TAXMAN230(Delhi)
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. This appeal pertains to the assessment year 2003-04. It is directed against the order dated 25.4.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs. 26,72,717/- on account of interest allegedly due on delay in payment of the installment of the consideration money. As per the assessee, the interest did not accrue to it in as much as the original agreement dated 3.7.2002 had been modified by a letter dated 1.8.2002. It is not in dispute that if the letter dated 1.8.2002 is said to operate, then the interest would not have been due to the assessee. An issue sought to be raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the letter dated 1.8.2002 was an afterthought as held by the Assessing Officer and ought not to be relied upon.2. On this aspect we find that the Assessing Officer had made several observations and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had examined the comments of the appellant in respect of e...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Mohinder Singh Vs. Shri Kartar Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 156(2009)DLT526
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. The original suit bearing Suit No. 758/2001 was filed by the appellant, Mohinder Singh, against the respondents for the partition of his alleged 1/4th share in the property bearing Municipal No. WZ-2, Mohalla Krishan Nagar, Sahibpura, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'Suit Property') and also for rendition of accounts of rent received and realized by the respondents from the tenants of the shops in the suit property.2. The case set up by the appellant in the plaint was that Late Smt. Attar Kaur (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') who was the owner of the suit property died intestate on 13.08.84 leaving behind her husband, respondent No. 1, and three sons, appellant and respondents No. 2 and 3 as her legal heirs. That since the deceased died intestate, the appellant being son of the deceased, is entitled to 1/4th share in the suit property as per the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.3. The respondents No. 1 and 3 conteste...
Tag this Judgment!