Delhi Court May 2008 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2008 Page 10 of about 224 results (0.021 seconds)Mariamma Joseph and ors. Vs. S. Vinay Tiwari
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2008(104)DRJ331
V.B. Gupta, J.1. Appellants have filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation as awarded in this case by the learned Tribunal.2. Vide the judgment dated 3rd August, 2002 passed by Sh. Ajit Bharioke, Judge, MACT, Shahdara, Delhi, a sum of Rs. 17,45,000/- together with 9% interest thereon from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 18th September, 2002 till the realization of the amount, was passed in favour of the appellants and respondent No. 4 and against respondents No. 1 to 3.3. Brief facts of this case are that on 15th July, 2000, after his night duty, the deceased T.M. Joseph was returning home on his two wheeler scooter No. DL-7SJ9877. The deceased was driving the scooter and his colleague K. Joy was sitting as a pillion rider. They left Mother Dairy after 6 a.m. On reaching, Ghaziabad Red Light Crossing on Delhi-Ghaziabad Highway, the deceased stopped his scooter and was waiting for the green signal. In the meanwhile, a Truck No. DL1GA 3014 which was being d...
Tag this Judgment!Delite Kom Limited Vs. Government of Nct of Delhi Through Secretary, P ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 150(2008)DLT138; 2008(103)DRJ619
Madan B. Lokur, J.1. The Petitioner is said to be a leading manufacturer of office automation tables, almirahs, book cases, racks, filing cabinets, compactors, lab. furniture, modular furniture and wide range of chairs of latest design, technology and manufacturing process. The Petitioner says that it is an ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 14001 certified company and has experience of more than four decades.2. The Petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that a tender notice was issued by the Executive Engineer of the Public Works Department (PWD) of the Government of Delhi for providing modular work staff chairs, tables and compactors for use in the Delhi High Court and the Petitioner was completely overlooked for consideration because the tender notice was with reference to these items manufactured only by Godrej or their authorized dealers. According to the Petitioner, the amount involved in the tender is considerable and there is no reason why established organizations such as the Petitioner shoul...
Tag this Judgment!Maqsood Yusuf Merchant Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Thru. the Secretary
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2008(103)DRJ634
Vikramajit Sen, J.1. The feature at the fulcrum of the friction before us pertains to the parameters within which the Writ Court can provide its protection to the Petitioners at the pre-execution stage of preventive detention orders passed against them. The law on this subject was crystalized and enunciated in the decision of a Three-Judge Bench of Supreme Court in Addl. Secy. to the Govt. of India v. Alka Subhash Gadia : 1991(53)ELT481(SC) which has been followed in almost all subsequent cases. The only exception that we have come across is Union of India v. Parasmal Rampuria : (1998)8SCC402 in which their Lordships held that the Petitioner must surrender before he can be heard in his challenge to the legality of the Detention Order; significantly, Gadia was not cited before their Lordships. In Sayed Taher Bawamiya v. Joint Secretary to the Govt. of India : 2002CriLJ259 , which is a Three-Judge Bench decision, the five Gadia exceptions had been reiterated, namely, that courts would be...
Tag this Judgment!Rajinder Kumar Vs. Smt. Neelam Gadhok and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2009ACJ1502; 2008(103)DRJ628
Kailash Gambhir, J.1. The present appeal arises out of the interim order dated 30/05/2003 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Delhi.2. The facts of the case in nutshell for proper appreciation of the matter are as follows:On 15/10/1996 at about 7:00 pm the deceased Sh. Atul Kumar met with an accident after being hit by a maruti van bearing registration No. DNJ 1006. The said van was being driven by its driver, Sh. Ashok Kumar in a most rash and negligent manner, without caring for the traffic rules, without giving any signal or indicator and without blowing any horn and hit Sh. Atul Kumar. As a result of which, the deceased received fatal injuries and was rushed to the hospital where after being admitted to the hospital for a month, he succumbed to his injuries on 15/11/1996.3. Sh. O.P Wadhwa, counsel for the appellant has assailed the interim order dated 30/05/2003 on the ground that the learned tribunal failed to appreciate that the appellant Sh. Rajinder Kumar had sold the vehicl...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Kashmiro Devi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 150(2008)DLT151; 2009(3)SLJ249(Delhi)
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The petitioner seeks ordinary family pension which has been stopped on account of her remarriage to the brother of her deceased husband, who died in service.2. Late Sepoy Sher Singh joined Army and died while in active service on 02.12.1975. The petitioner, being the wife of the deceased Sepoy, was granted ordinary family pension from the said date. The petitioner, as per local customs, remarried the real brother of her deceased husband on 21.11.1977 and the ordinary family pension was discontinued from the date of the marriage. It appears that the petitioner did not raise the issue further for almost 17 years when she sent a legal notice through her counsel on 10.06.1994 demanding release of the pension. In reply to the said demand, the respondents vide letter dated 14.07.1994 informed her that she was not entitled to the ordinary family pension in view of her marriage to the brother of her deceased husband. The petitioner has thereafter filed the present peti...
Tag this Judgment!National Highways Authority of India Vs. Spcl-ivrcl (Jv)
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2008(2)ARBLR404(Delhi)
S. Ravindra Bhat, J.1. The petitioner approaches this Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, challenging an award. The parties had entered into a contract, awarded by the petitioner, to the respondent pursuant to the latter's tender dated 20.04.2001 for Rs. 2,29,75,93,104 for widening and upgrading portions of the National Highway, NH-5 in Andhra Pradesh. Disputes arose and were referred to arbitration, through invocation of the arbitration clause, on 24.06.2004.2. The arbitrators had, through their decision, ruled against the petitioner, and allowed claims preferred by the respondent. The respondent/ claimant has objected to the jurisdiction of this Court, on the ground that at an earlier stage, an application was filed under Section 9, for interim measures, before the Court at Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, and contended that due to operation of Section 42, this Court's jurisdiction is excluded. The question relating to jurisdiction was treated, with conse...
Tag this Judgment!L.D. Nayar and Sons Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR2008Delhi179; 151(2008)DLT27
S. Ravindra Bhat, J.1. The petitioner, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks a direction to quash proceedings and orders made under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971- hereafter called 'the Act'- in respect of premises owned by the respondent (hereafter called 'the bank') being two shops; the Estate Officer had directed eviction by order dated 24-8-1991; the Additional District Judge, acting as appellate authority, had rejected the appeal, by his order dated 24-8-2001.2. The petitioner had been inducted as tenant in respect of two shops, on 25-3-1963, and 20-4-1963, respectively in the Punjab National Bank building (also known as the PNB shopping complex). The tenancy continued even after management of the first respondent bank was nationalized, in 1970. The petitioner alleges having been regular in payment of rent and other charges. 3. On 11-8-1986, the landlord bank issued notices, terminating the tenancy on the ground that it required ...
Tag this Judgment!Rakesh Vats S/O Rajinder Narayan Vats Vs. Ms. Sharda Vats W/O Sh. Rake ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2008(104)DRJ296
V.B. Gupta, J.1. The present appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short as the 'Act') read with Order XLI Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been filed by appellant against the ex parte judgment dated 23.05.05 passed by Sh. K.S.Pal, Additional District Judge, Delhi.2. Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of this appeal are recapitulated. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 26.04.86 at New Delhi as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. After the marriage, the appellant went to U.S.A. in the year 1987 as per settlement between the parties but he could not settle there because of harassment and torture by the respondent and her family members and as such he come back to India in the year 1990 and thereafter the appellant in order to maintain his matrimonial obligations kept on going to U.S.A. in the year 1990, 1994 and 1999 but could not settle there because he was treated so badly by the respondent and his family member...
Tag this Judgment!Babusha International Vs. Canara Bank
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR2008Delhi185; 151(2008)DLT560; 2008(105)DRJ497
S. Ravindra Bhat, J.1. In these proceedings, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, a sole proprietary concern of Shri Virender Khullar, challenges a letter dated 25th August, 2005 (hereafter 'the impugned letter') written by the respondent Canara Bank (herafter 'the bank') withdrawing the One Time Settlement (OTS) in respect of its (the petitioner's) liabilities. 2. The facts necessary to decide the case are the petitioner borrowed amounts from the respondent Canara Bank in February, 1997. The total limit sanctioned was Rs. 1.7 crores. These were commercial advances. The advances were secured through collateral security, by mortgaging property bearing No KP-124, HSIDC, Industrial Area, Kundli Tehsil, District Sonepat, Haryana. The petitioner was unable to repay the amounts in time and incurred a liability to the extent of Rs. 1.31 crores. The Bank filed an application for recovery of that amount with interest before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, (DRT) New Delhi...
Tag this Judgment!Rajiv Sharma @ Hari Kishan Sharma Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 150(2008)DLT753; 2008(105)DRJ551
S.L. Bhayana, J.1. The petitioner, by virtue of the present petition, seeks the removal of his name from the area surveillance register and for a direction to the respondent to destroy his history sheet which has been kept in their records. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the present petition are that there were certain cases registered against the petitioner at Police Stations Shahdara and Pratap Nagar. He has never been convicted by the Court and some of the cases out of those, which have been registered against him, are pending. According to the petitioner, he has been falsely implicated in these cases by the local police at the behest of the local people, who have some grudge against him. As a result of these cases, the petitioner's name has been entered in the register of history-sheeters. On the strength of these facts, learned Counsel for the petitioner had urged that in most of the cases the petitioner has either been discharged or acquitted and there are few cases that a...
Tag this Judgment!