Delhi Court April 2008 Judgments

Balvinder Kaur Vs. North Delhi Power Ltd.

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President (Oral): 1. The grievance of the appellant, which on the face of it is justified, is that the District Forum has not at all taken into consideration the observations made by this Commission vide order dated 17th April, 2007 passed in Appeal No. A. 1942/03 relating to the allegations of FAE and bill raised by the respondent thereon. 2. Perusal of the impugned order shows that the District Forum only decided the application under Section 27 of the C.P. Act based upon the order . 3. The observations made by this Commission were as under: There is no allegation of FAE against the appellant. The provisions with regard to the electricity bill raised by the respondent in respect of defective meter are contained in the Sections 20 and 21 of the Regulation of Delhi Electricity Regulation Commission, 2002. If There are allegation of FAE, it must not be for the period during which the meter remained defective and at the most may be from the date when the premises were inspec...

Rahul Rai Sur, Ips S/O Baljit Rai Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Rahul Rai Sur, an officer of Indian Police Service 1981 batch of Mahrashtra cadre, and presently serving as Chief, Conduct and Discipline Unit of the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti, the applicant herein, has filed this Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari so as to quash notification dated 26.9.2005 treating him as deemed to have resigned from the Indian Police Service.The facts culminating into the order aforesaid, as projected in the Application, would need necessary mention.2. The applicant joined service in December, 1981 and is said to have excelled from the very beginning of the training period and in the various assignments that were given to him during the span of his service up to 1997. The applicant has listed all his achievements, but there would be no need to make mention thereof. Suffice it, however, to say that the track record of the applicant does appear to be very im...

Phool Singh S/O Late Shri Tej Singh Vs. the Director General, Employee ...

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. By this OA applicant has challenged order dated 23.8.2007 (page 10) whereby his appeal has been rejected, order dated 20.11.2006 whereby he has been compulsorily retired from service (page 44) and the entire disciplinary proceedings seeking consequential benefits.2. It is submitted by the applicant that he belongs to Khatik community in State of Uttar Pradesh. He was issued a caste certificate by the Tehsildar on 22.10.1987 (page 15) to the effect that he belongs to Scheduled Tribe (ST) community. On 16.6.1990 respondents had issued advertisement for filling up two posts of ECG Technician meant for Scheduled Caste (SC) but subsequently a corrigendum was issued showing them to be reserved for ST. Since applicant fulfilled all the conditions, he applied for same against ST post and was appointed as ECG Technician vide order dated 13.10.1990. In the offer of appointment, it was mentioned that he would be on probation for a period of 2 years. He was confirmed on completing 2 years of s...

Shri Mohammad Razak Clts (Retd.) Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) (Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. By this OA applicant has sought direction to respondents to make payment of leave encashment amount in respect of 300 days accumulated EL as per law at the rate of last pay drawn with interest @ 18% p.a.from the date it fell due till the date it is paid.2. It is submitted by the applicant that he had filed OA No. 427/2004 seeking pensionary benefits, which was finally decided on 22.4.2004 (page-12 at 19), whereby respondent No. 1 was directed to consider the case of applicant for relaxation of rules treating it to be a case of undue hardship for grant of pensionary benefits al least treating the applicant service as 10 years qualifying for the purpose of pension. It was also held that in the event the aforesaid proposal is acceded to, applicant shall be granted pension and other benefits in accordance with the rules.3. Pursuant to above directions, respondents passed order dated 07.12.2004 conveying the ex-post facto sanction for regularization of services of Mohd. Razak w.e.f. his...

Prem Singh Safai Karamchari Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. By this OA applicant has challenged Office Order dated 28.2.2007 whereby on completion of one month's notice period, service of the applicant had been terminated with effect from 1.3.2007 A/N (page 13) and Memorandum dated 9.8.2007 whereby his representation has been rejected (page 15). He has also sought a direction to the respondents to reinstate him immediately with all consequential benefits.2. It is stated by the applicant that he joined as a daily wage Safai Karamchari on 16.5.1994. He was appointed on temporary post of Safiawala on 4.4.1998. He had completed his probation period on 4.4.2000 and was confirmed. He had been performing his duties to the entire satisfaction of the respondents all along.3. Unfortunately, he fell sick on 27.8.2006 due to viral fever and could not attend his duties. He duly informed the office and submitted his leave application along with documents also but respondents stopped his pay with effect from 1.9.2006. He received show cause notice dated 2...

indus Valley Promoters Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2008]305ITR202(Delhi)

V.B. Gupta, J.1. Present appeal has been filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short as 'Act') by the assessed against the order dated 29th May, 2003 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench 'B' (for short as 'Tribunal') in ITA No. 3785/Del/01 relevant for the assessment year 1998-99.2. The brief facts of this case are that the assessed company filed return declaring a loss of Rs. 4,93,218/- and which was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act on the same figure. Subsequently, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued and regular assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Act were taken up. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed an increase in the share application money account as compared to the preceding assessment year and vis-?-vis the account of Shri Sanjay Gupta who is the Director of the assessed company, it was noticed that a sum of Rs. 11.82 lacs had been received during the previous year...

Sheela Vs. State Nct of Delhi and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 149(2008)DLT476; 2008(102)DRJ652

Reva Khetrapal, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner prays for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondent No. 2 to produce the son of the petitioner, Rohit, aged about four years and to hand over the custody of the said child to the petitioner. A writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction to the respondent No. 1 to register an FIR against the respondent No. 2 is also prayed for.2. On issuance of notice to the respondents, the respondent No. 2 'husband appeared in person and by an order dated August 21, 2007 was directed to hand over the custody of the child to the petitioner' mother in the Court. The petitioner was, however, directed to bring the child on the following day to the Court, that is, on 22nd August, 2007. On the said date, an order was passed by a Division Bench of this Court, which reads as under:Husband of the petitioner is present in the Court and he undertakes to take his wife and son to his place of work from Delhi. They shall live toge...

Sh. K.L. Malhotra Through His Legal Heirs Vs. Smt. Sudershan Kumari an ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 149(2008)DLT783

Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. On 20.03.2008 the matter was reserved for judgment. On the said date, appellants were directed to file written submissions within a week. Respondent was granted a week's time to respond. I waited till 31.03.2008 for the written submissions to be filed by the appellant. Unfortunately, appellant has chosen not to file the written submissions thereforee I have no option but to decide the present appeal with reference to the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal which alone were projected at the hearing.2. The question involved in the appeal is whether the finding returned by the learned trial court that the will dated 17.04.1973 Ex.PW 1/1 is the last legal and valid testament executed by the Late Smt Mela Devi @ Iqbal Devi is correct.Backdrop Facts3. Smt. Mela Devi @ Iqbal Devi (hereinafter referred to as the testatrix) died on 10.02.1987 leaving behind her two married daughters namely Smt. Sudershan Kumari Handa and Smt. Pushpa as her heirs.4. Smt. Sudershan K...

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Deepak JaIn and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 149(2008)DLT172; 2008(102)DRJ641

Sanjiv Khanna, J.1. As similar questions and issues arise for consideration in these two Writ Petitions, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. Application under Order VI, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the Code, for short) filed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as MCD, for short) raising additional grounds of appeal will also be disposed of by this common judgment. During the course of hearing, arguments on the said applications were also addressed.2. The above writ petitions filed by the MCD pertain to property No. M- 6, Hauz Khas, New Delhi. The said property is owned by Mr.Deepak Jain and Ms. Trishla Jain, (hereinafter referred to as the respondents, for short). Writ Petition (Civil) No. 14887/2004 pertain to the year 1999-2000 and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 14897/2004 pertains to the year 2000-2001. Assessment for these years was made vide Order dated 28th March, 2002 passed by the Joint Assessor a...

Aditya College of Pharmacy and Science and anr. Vs. Government of Delh ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(102)DRJ657

Mukundakam Sharma, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 10th May, 2006 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition of the appellants herein.2. The second appellant is a society imparting higher education in the field of medicine and management. With the intention of setting up a College of Pharmacy in Delhi, the second appellant established the Aditya College of Pharmacy and Science, the appellant No. 1 herein, and in the year 1998 approached the DDA for the allotment of land. It also sought for permission from the respondent No. 2- All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE for short) to set up the above Pharmacy College. Though AICTE granted the said permission to the appellants on 18th November, 1998, the same was only on a year to year basis, as certain conditions could not be fulfillled by the appellants. The terms and conditions which are imposed and are required to be complied with both for recommendation and also for gran...