Delhi Court February 2008 Judgments

In Re: Avm Land Developers (P.) Ltd.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2008]86SCL148(Delhi)

ORDERVipin Sanghi, J.1. This is an application under Section 391(1), read with Sections 393 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the applicant Aerens Entertainment Zone Limited, seeking directions from the Court for convening, holding and conducting separate meetings of the equity shareholders, secured and unsecured creditors, which are statutorily required for sanctioning the scheme of arrangement for amalgamation of AVM Land Developers Pvt. Ltd. with the applicant/transferee company Aerens Entertainment Zone Limited.2. The registered office of the applicant/Transferee company is situated at 6th Floor, Mahindra Tower, 2A, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi, that is, within the jurisdiction of this Court.3. The Board of Directors of the Applicant/Transferee company and the Transferor company have passed separate resolutions approving the scheme of arrangement for amalgamation of Transferor company with the Transferee company on 25-10-2007, copies of whi...

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Alka Mangla and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2010ACJ272; AIR2008Delhi201; 2008(103)DRJ384

Kailash Gambhir, J.1. The present appeal arises out of the award dated 14th January, 2008 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 4,01,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum to the claimants.2. The brief conspectus of the facts are as follows:On 23-9-2002 at about 2.15 a.m. the appellant-Smt. Alka Mangla was travelling in a Toyota Qualis car bearing Registration No. DL 8CG 5463, which was being driven by her husband respondent No. 1. When the said Qualis coming from the direction of ISBT reached on Ring Road near Budh Vihar Picket, Delhi, a truck bearing Registration No. HR 38A, 8581 was standing stationary in the middle of the road without any indication or signal, due to this, the said car smashed into the truck with a great force. As a result, the petitioner, her husband and the driver of the truck received grievous injuries.3. A claim petition was filed on 29th April, 2005 and an award was made on 14th January, 2008. Aggrieved with the sa...

inspector Surinder Kumar Verma Vs. Government of N.C.T.D. Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Surinder Kumar Verma, Inspector in Delhi Police, applicant herein, has filed this Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, calling in question order Annexure A-1 dated 22.05.2007 vide which a decision has been taken to commence regular departmental enquiry against him, order Annexure A-2 dated 06.092007 vide which his representation against the order aforesaid has since been rejected being not maintainable as also order Annexure A-3, summary of allegations on which the applicant is to be departmentally tried.2. Brief facts of the case culminating into departmental enquiry against the applicant reveal that the applicant was appointed as Sub Inspector in the year 1977 and thereafter promoted to the rank of Inspector in 1993. He was thereafter suspended vide order dated 21.02.2007 issued by DCP/West District. He made representation against the said order and in consideration thereof, the order of suspension was revoked. He was, however, served w...

Abha Tyagi D/O K.C. Sharma Vs. Secretary Services, Government

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Abha Tyagi, the applicant herein, having rendered more than twenty years of service, out of which ten years were in grade of Rs. 6500-10500 on the post of Administrative Officer, and when she was waiting for her next promotion to the post of Deputy Director having already put in requisite number of years in the feeder post of Administrative Officer, consequent upon being declared surplus vide order dated 5.10.2004, has been redeployed on the post of Head Clerk in pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000. The applicant takes strong exception for relegating her to a pay scale which would be not only two stages below the status of Administrative Officer but also two scales below. This, it is her case, would be against CCS (Redeployment of Surplus Staff) Rules, 1990 (hereinafter to be referred as the Rules of 1990), and that the applicant has been singled out for invidious discrimination in the matter of redeployment, and further that the respondents have denied equivalent post in equivalent pay, ev...

Subhash Chand S/O Shri Ajab Singh Vs. Delhi Development Authority

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi by order dated 24.10.2007 has transferred the above matter to this Tribunal, which was pending with them as WPC No. 6244/1998. In reply to the averments in the original petition, counter affidavit had come to be filed, followed by a rejoinder-dated 24.12.1999. At each stage, documents had come to be marked. After the case had reached this Tribunal, on 22.01.2008, additionally, four documents had been made available at the instance of the applicant. Profusely, in the course of arguments, reference was being made to all such documents, and while disposing of the application, we may also have to advert to some of them to be picked up necessarily at random and not in definite order. Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, had appeared on behalf of the applicant and Mr. Arun Birbal appeared on behalf of the respondents.3. In response to a Notification dated 15.06.1985, issued by the Delhi Development Authority, inviting applications for the post of Junior Engineer, the a...

Yogender Singh, Ex. Constable Vs. Commissioner of Police,

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Vide order dated 11.12.2007 this Application was dismissed in default for want of prosecution. Applicant has filed MA No.136/2008 praying for recalling the order aforesaid. For the reasons mentioned therein, the MA is allowed and the Original Application is restored to its original position, and taken up for hearing.2. Yogender Singh, a former constable in Delhi Police, the applicant herein, through present Application filed by him under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, has challenged the order passed by the disciplinary authority dated 2.2.2005 vide which on account of his unauthorised absence from duty for 471 days, he has been dismissed from service, as also the order passed by the appellate authority dated 15.6.2006 dismissing his appeal preferred against the order aforesaid.3. The facts of the case which are not much in dispute reveal that a departmental enquiry was conducted against the applicant under provisions of Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) ...

D.P. Bambah, S/O Late Shri Chunni Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. W.P.C. 9867 of 2005 had been filed by the applicant for quashing a Memorandum dated 23.08.2004 issued by the 5th respondent, Commissioner, Delhi Development Authority. The applicant had put up a request that he was entitled for notional promotion, in view of the circumstance that the charge sheet issued against him, which stood in the way of his promotion, ultimately had been quashed by the High Court but he had nevertheless been advised that claim for promotion to the post of Supdt. Engineer was not tenable. The writ petition had been transferred over to this Tribunal by order-dated 24.10.2007.2. The applicant was working as Executive Engineer under the respondents during 1996. On 25.07.1996, a charge sheet had been issued to him, which, in turn, obliged the DPC held on 26.07.1996 to keep its recommendations in respect of the applicant in a sealed cover. It is evident that Writ Petition (C) 2943/1996 had been filed challenging the charge sheet. The imputations as against the appli...

Mr. Purshottam Ramnani Vs. Government of Nct of Delhi and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008CriLJ3266; 2008(101)DRJ682

Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. This Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioner with following prayers:(a) issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents No. 2 and 3 not to obstruct/restrain the petitioner from visiting flat No. 53, Swastik Kunj, Plot No. 29, Sector-13, Rohini, Delhi;(b) issue appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents No. 2 and 3 to register the complaint dated 7.9.2007 of the petitioner addressed to DCP (North West);(c) issue appropriate writ, order or direction by quashing the proceedings under Sections 107/151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure initiated against the petitioner at the instance of respondents No. 4 and 5;(d) issue appropriate writ, order or direction against respondents 1 to 3 to award damages to the petitioner for having been illegally sent to jail at the instance of respondents No. 4 and 5;(e) Award costs in favor of the petitioner and agai...

Sh. Ramashish Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(102)DRJ426

Veena Birbal, J.1. By this writ petition, petitioner assails the order dated 5.4.2007, passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, hereinafter referred to as 'The Tribunal', dismissing O.A. No. 2257/2006, by which the petitioner had challenged order dated 2.2.2005 passed by Disciplinary Authority dismissing him from service and order dated 3.3.3005 passed by appellate authority upholding the punishment. Petitioner has also challenged the order dated 30.7.2007 of Tribunal by which his application seeking review of aforesaid order was also dismissed.2. Facts necessary for the disposal of the present writ petition are that the petitioner was appointed as a chowkidar with respondent on 10.4.1980. He was regularised in services on 10.4.85 as chowkidar. In the year 1986, he gave representation to the respondent for promotion to the post of peon as his junior Shri R.S. Pandey was promoted. When no action was taken, he filed O.A. No. 710/1998 before the Tribunal for promotion to the post of peo...

Vijay and anr. Vs. State and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: I(2008)DMC875; 2008(102)DRJ294

S. Muralidhar, J.1. These petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('CrPC') seek the quashing of FIR No. 177 of 2004 under Sections 498A/406 IPC registered at Police Station Jaffarpur Kalan pending in the court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate ('MM'), New Delhi and all proceedings consequent thereto.2. The Petitioners in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1860-61 of 2006 are the cousin brothers of the complainant's husband. The Petitioners in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1862-63 of 2006 are the brother-in-law (Nandoi) of the complainant and the father of the Nandoi. The Petitioners in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1880-82 of 2006 are Smt. Sukhma the sister of the husband's father, her husband Hukam Singh and their daughter Smt. Magan.3. The narration in the FIR is that Shri Mamraj Yadav son of Shri D.R. Yadav married the complainant Smt. Lalita on 15th May 2002. It is stated that in 2004 the complainant lodged a complaint in the Crime Against Women Cell ('CAW Cell') Police Stati...