Delhi Court May 2008 Judgments

Gagan Chopra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 156(2009)DLT77

V.K. Shali, J.1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the award bearing No. 10/87-88 dated 19th May, 1987 of Village Shayoorpur. The petitioner has also in the writ petition prayed for declaration to the effect that the entries in the revenue record relating to the land of the petitioner falling in Khasra Nos. 192/1 (0-10) and 192/2 (4-06) measuring 4 bighas 16 biswas, in the aforesaid Village Shayoorpur, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi is illegal, unlawful, arbitrary and unwarranted and to re-transfer the aforesaid land in the revenue record in the name of the petitioner.2. Briefly stated the facts set up by the petitioner are that he is claiming himself to be the purchaser of the aforesaid two parcels of land by a registered sale deed dated 24th April, 1980 from the previous owner. It is alleged by the petitioner that on 25.11.1980, a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in respect of land situated in 13 Villages in South Delhi included the V...

Jeet Kaur Vs. State (Nct) of Delhi and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(104)DRJ255

Veena Birbal, J.1. Petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 29.8.2007 by which succession certificate granted in her favour by the learned Administrative Civil Judge has been revoked and in consequence thereof vide order dated 4.2.2008 she has been asked to deposit an amount of Rs. 5,02,403/- in the form of FDR in court. She has also challenged order dated 3.4.2008 by which her review application has also been dismissed.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that learned Administrative Civil Judge, Delhi has committed illegality in revoking the succession certificate which was granted in favour of petitioners vide order dated 6.3.2003. It is further contended that learned Judge failed to appreciate that the petitioner was joint owner of fixed deposit of Rs. 4,52,000/- for which petitioner had obtained succession certificate for the aforesaid FDR wherein half of the amount was belonging to her. It is prayed that the impugned order is illegal and same be set aside....

ishwar Singh and anr. Vs. Land Acquisition Collector (Sw)

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(103)DRJ519

T.S. Thakur, J.1. In these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners assail the legality of an award No. 1/2007-08 made by the Collector, Land Acquisition primarily on the ground that the Collector has not, while determining the compensation payable to the land owners, conducted an enquiry in terms of Section 11 of the Act or properly applied his mind to the material available on record. The respondents have appeared to oppose the petitions and raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability thereof. It is contended on their behalf that the petitioners have, during the pendency of these writ petitions, got proper references made to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for determination of the compensation payable to them. The question whether and if so what enhancement in the amount awarded by the Collector is deserved by the petitioners therefore falls for consideration in the said references making it unnecessary for...

Society of Catalysts Vs. Vodaphone Essar Mobile Services Limited.

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President (Oral): 1. This case demonstrates corporate greed. 2. Vodaphone Essar Mobile Services Limited arraigned as opposite party (in short OP) is a telecom company providing cellular connections to the consumers residing in different parts of India, including Delhi. In its cellular service, apart from voice, it has various value added services which include SMS (Short message service). It charges for all these services either on the basis of per call/per SMS or on the basis of various schemes. It also provides interconnectivity to cellular users of other telecom service providers. This is also a commercial company with shares being regularly quoted on the stock exchange. There are about 200 lacs Hutch users in the country. 3. OP which is even otherwise having very roaring business indulged in highly unethical, unfair and deceptive trade practice to promote its business interests directly as well as indirectly by launching a scheme or contest through which it has garnere...

Deepak Kumar Goyal Vs. Uti Bank

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President (Oral): 1. Vide impugned order dated. 1.7.2005 the complaint of the appellant seeking refund of Rs. 860 towards the shortage shown in the balance in his account was dismissed by accepting the version of the respondent bank that the appellant did not maintain savings average balance in his account during the quarter 25.12.2004 to 24. 3.2005 and as per bank norms, a sum of Rs. 551 and Rs. 308.56 being charges for non-maintenance of average quarterly balance and transaction charges were debited by it. Feeling aggrieved the appellant has preferred this appeal. 2. According to the appellant he opened his account with the respondent bank and was issued ATM card by it. When he went to the respondent bank for using ATM card he found that there was a balance of Rs. 9,540 whereas it should have been Rs. 10,400 and thus there was a shortage of Rs. 860. 3. As referred above, the bank debited this account towards charges for non-maintenance of average quarterly balance by rel...

Delhi Development Authority Vs. Sudershan Bharija

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President (Oral): 1. On the allegation of having been allotted a flat which was 10 years old under the Narela Housing Scheme, 2002 and was in dilapidated condition as he had opted for the scheme subsequently, though he was originally registered in the LIG Rohini Residential Plotted Scheme, 1981, the District Forum has vide impugned order dated 5.3.2005 directed the appellant to give the old priority number i.e. 15139 in the Rohini Housing Scheme, 1981 to the respondent and to pay Rs. 5,000 as compensation towards deficiency in service and for adopting unfair trade practices including harassment and mental agony and Rs. 2,000 towards cost of litigation. Feeling aggrieved the appellant has preferred this appeal. 2. There is no dispute as to the respondent being a successful allottee under the Scheme called Narela Housing Scheme, 2002. The scheme floated by the appellant was as under: SCHEME This scheme is called Narela Housing Scheme, 02 of the DDA. Under this scheme applica...

Ridhi Gupta Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd.

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President (Oral): 1. The impugned order dated 13.6.2005 is an ex parte order whereby the complaint of the appellant seeking indemnification of the loss of cash of Rs. 40,000 against Shopkeepers Policy was dismissed on the premise that the loss was not as per terms of the policy that the cash should be in hand whereas the cash that was lost was in the car. Feeling aggrieved the appellant has preferred this appeal. 2. Relevant facts, in brief, are that the appellant obtained a Shopkeepers Policy from the respondent. The policy was effective from 17.6.2000 to 16.6.2001. The policy covered money transit risk upto Rs. 50,000. Unfortunately the appellant suffered a cash loss of Rs. 40,000 while in transit. The Manager of the appellant was going to bank to deposit Rs. 40,000 but on way he stopped at a place to collect some more money. While he was away from the vehicle for about 5 minutes, somebody stole the cash from the car. Police report was lodged vide FIR No. 73/01. The appe...

Mr. S.R. Gupta S/O Sh. Dharamchand Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi (Through ...

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Three Original Applications (O.A Nos. 944/2001, 1040/2007 and 402/1996) had been listed together for hearing but out of them OA 402/1996 had been placed only for reference if need arose. Primarily, we are concerned with OA 944/2001 alone since it is submitted by counsel for the applicants in OA 1040/2007 that its fate will depend upon the outcome of the connected case. The respondents, as preliminary objection, had challenged the maintainability of the application itself. In view of the peculiar facts that have been presented, even for examination of this contention itself we will have to go into some details.2. In O.A. 944/2001, there are twelve applicants. It is submitted that some of them have already retired from service. The Government of NCT of Delhi, and the Secretary, Directorate of Social Welfare are the official respondents. Respondents 4 to 19 are private respondents. The effort, as evident from the Original Application, is to ensure that private respondents are not prom...

Smt. Tripti Dutta, Prt, Group C, Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Applicant in OA 2184/2007 obtained B-Ed degree in the year 1987 from Mahila Gram Vidhyapitha, Prayag, Allahabad and joined as a Primary Teacher in Kendriya Vidhyalaya Sangthan (KVS) on 29.10.1988 whereas applicant in OA 242/2008 obtained B-Ed degree from Maithili Vishwa Vidhyalaya Dharbhanga, Bihar. The aforesaid degrees have been found to have been recognized by the Ministry of Education, Government of India.2. However, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the applicant in OA 2184/2007 on the ground that B-Ed degree obtained by the applicant was from a non-recognized university, which is fake as per the UGC letter dated Feb.2002. Accordingly, applicant has committed a misconduct, whereas the applicant in OA 242/2008 has been charged of misconduct on the ground that he acquired B-Ed degree from Maithili Vishwa Vidhyalaya, which is not recognized university as per UGC. In both the cases, inquiry officer did not prove the charge and on the basis of one decided case by the ...

Vijay Kumar Arora Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 150(2008)DLT638; II(2008)DMC58; 2008(103)DRJ661

Vikramajit Sen, J.1. This Appeal is against the Judgment dated 29.9.1992 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi (ASJ for brevity) in FIR 154/83 P.S. Moti Nagar, whereby the Appellant/Convict, Shri Vijay Kumar Arora, son of Shri S.P. Arora, was awarded a sentence of life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only) and in default of its payment further rigorous imprisonment of one year under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short). On 11.1.1985 the Appellant/Convict as well as his mother, Smt. Beena Arora, wife of Shri S.P. Arora, were charged thus-That you in the night intervening between 5.4.83 and 6.4.83 at the house No. F-503, Karampura, within the jurisdiction of P.S. Moti Nagar, Delhi, in furtherance of the common intention you both, committed murder by intentionally causing the death of Smt. Shashi Arora w/o Shri Vijay Kumar Arora and thereby committed an offence punishable Under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and within th...