Delhi Court May 2008 Judgments

Deepali Design and Exhibits P. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(104)DRJ186

T.S. Thakur, J.1. In this petition for a writ of certiorari, the petitioners call in question the allotment of a contract on a turn-key basis for making boarding and lodging arrangements and for erection of a convention hall and making other related arrangements for a 'Convention of Presidents of Zila Parishads and Panchayat Samitis' to be held in Burari grounds, Delhi from the 22nd to 24th April, 2008. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that the award of the contract for making the aforementioned arrangements for a convention that is scheduled to host as many as 10,000 participants is illegal inasmuch as respondent No. 2 was ineligible in terms of the conditions of the tender notice to submit a tender. It is also the case of the petitioner that the respondents had committed an irregularity in entertaining a tender on behalf of a consortium of three different concerns as the tender notice in question did not envisage the submission of bids by consortia. The short question that f...

Pratibha Lalwani and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(105)DRJ464

Veena Birbal, J.1. By way of present petition petitioner has challenged impugned order dated 10th April, 2008 passed by learned ADJ in LAC No 48/2006, 49/2006 and 95/2006.2. Briefly the facts of the case are as under:Petitioners are daughters of deceased Pyare Lal Sharma. Respondents are their cousins. As per respondents father of petitioners executed alleged Will dated 24.12.1975 wherein properties situated at Bhartal and Dhoolsiras, Delhi had been given by him to Sh. Prabhu Dayal Sharma i.e. father of respondents. Later on the said property was acquired Govt of India and compensation has been claimed by the legal heirs of alleged beneficiary of late Prabhu Dayal Sharma i.e. respondent Nos. 2 to 5. Three references under Section 30-31 of Land acquisition Act, 1894 are pending before learned ADJ. Petitioners have denied their father executed alleged Will. They are claiming the compensation in respect of land of their father whereas respondents are relying on the alleged Will dated 24.1...

S.K. Srivastava Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through Joint

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. Shri S.K. Srivastava, who superannuated on 29.12.2000 while holding the post of Sub-Registrar, along with his farewell on the said date while bidding adieu, was also handed over a memorandum proposing to initiate departmental proceedings against him under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965. The memorandum aforesaid was accompanied by Annexure-I containing statement of articles of charge framed against him in respect of which the enquiry was proposed, as also statement of imputation of misconduct/misbehaviour in support of the articles of charge, as Annexure-II. Annexure-I recites that the applicant, while functioning as Sub-Registrar-V, INA, had illegally registered a sale deed in respect of government land comprised in Khasra No. 224 measuring 6 bighas and 18 biswas situated in the revenue estate of village Bahpur without obtaining the NOC/permission from the competent authority on 23.6.1999 of sale deed No. 1112, book No. 1, pag...

Avnish Bajaj Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 150(2008)DLT769; 2008(105)DRJ721

S. Muralidhar, J.Introduction1.1 Over three and a half years ago, an internet website carried a listing which offered for sale a video clip, shot on a mobile phone, of two children of a school in Delhi indulging in an explicitly sexual act. The petitioner, who was the Managing Director (MD) of the company that owned the website at the relevant point in time, asks this Court to annul his criminal prosecution for the offences of making available for sale and causing to be published an obscene product within the meaning of Section 292 Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act 2000 (IT Act). This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 ('CrPC') also raises questions concerning the criminal liability of directors for the offences attributable to a company, both under the IPC as well as the IT Act, particularly when such company is not arraigned as an accused. 1.2 Before discussing the background and the sequence of events leading to t...

Major Suresh Rana Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 151(2008)DLT603

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The petitioner was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the Army Ordnance Corps on 22.12.1979 and was sent on deputation to DGAR, Shillong on 01.01.1992. The petitioner during the said deputation period was posted as Joint Assistant Director (Provisions) with HQ, DGAR and was entrusted with the duty of provisioning of general stores and clothing for the troops of Assam Rifles. In performance of his duties, requirements used to be received from the Maintenance Groups of the Assam Rifles for about 70 major items, which were dealt with by the petitioner.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was the junior-most officer in the Directorate and was serving directly under the officers of the rank of Colonel, Brigadier and Major General. The Directorate is headed by a Director General of the rank of Lieutenant General and all financial powers are vested with the Director General or his nominee being the Deputy Director General. Thus, all purchases were required ...

Dr. Shilpa Garg Vs. National Board of Examination (Dnb) and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(105)DRJ70

Sudershan Kumar Misra, J.1. The petitioner is a graduate doctor. She prays that the decision of the first respondent taken in December 2005 that henceforth, final/exit examinations, inter alia, in Venerology and Dermatology shall be held only on an annual basis in December of each year, instead of the earlier policy of holding biannual examinations in June and December of the same year, be quashed. And that in addition to the scheduled final examination in December 2008, the first respondent i.e., the National Board of Examinations, be directed to hold the said examination for the degree of, 'Diplomate of the National Board' [DNB for short] in Venerology and Dermatology, in June 2008 also.2. A brief background of the case is as follows;3. The National Board of Examination, who is the first respondent here, was established in 1975 with a view to, 'improving the quality of the medical education by elevating the level of established standards of postgraduate examinations and modern medici...

Shri Sarbir Singh Sarang S/O Late S. Inder Singh Vs. Shri Kanwal Sunir ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 153(2008)DLT456

ORDER1. By way of a separate order, IA No. 6600/2007 filed by the plaintiff seeking amendment of the plaint has been allowed conditionally. The plaintiff shall file the amended memo of parties within four weeks with advance copy to the other side. The defendants are directed to file the written statement to the amended plaint within four weeks with an advance copy to the counsel for the plaintiff who shall file replications within four weeks thereafter.2. Both the parties are directed to file their original documents, within four weeks, with advance copies to be exchanged with each other. The parties shall exchange the index of documents in advance and endorse the admission/denial of documents in a separate column on the index. After the admission/denial is conducted before the Joint Registrar, the exhibited documents shall also be endorsed on the list of documents of all the parties.3. List before the Joint Registrar on 18.9.2008, for admission/denial of documents....

Dhanesh Kumar Kasturia Vs. Sangeeta Kasturia

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2008(104)DRJ326

V.B. Gupta, J.1. The present appeal under Section 28(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short as the 'Act') has been filed by the Appellant/Husband against an order dated 06:07.06 passed by Sh. K.S. Pal, Additional District Magistrate, Delhi whereby the Trial Court dismissed the application of the Appellant under Section 26 of the Act read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for grant of an interim custody of Appellant's children by appointing him as a natural guardian.2. The relevant facts for disposal of the present appeal are that the marriage between the Appellant and Respondent was solemnized on 23.01.92 at New Delhi according to Hindu rites and ceremonies and the same was registered with the Registrar of marriage under the Act in Delhi on 18.08.93. Two children were born out of this wedlock. The elder son Master Vaibhav Kasturia was born on 18.11.92 and the younger son Master Vishesh Kasturia was born on 10.01.98. Later on, there started differences between...

Prem Chand Vs. Subhash Chand Saini and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR2008Delhi204; 150(2008)DLT737; 2008(105)DRJ516

Veena Birbal, J.1. Present petition is directed against the impugned order passed by Ld. Additional Rent Controller dated 12.02.2008 allowing the application of respondent/landlord for amendment of eviction petition which was originally filed on the ground of non-payment of rent. 2. Respondent/landlord has filed a petition under Section 14(1)(a) of Delhi Rent Control Act, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against petitioner/tenant seeking eviction of the tenanted premises. It is stated that the tenanted premises is situated in slum area. Before filing petition, respondent/landlord obtained permission from competent authority (Slum) vide order dated 07.07.2005. After obtaining the permission, a petition under Section 14(1)(a) of DRC Act was filed. During the pendency of the said eviction petition, respondent/landlord moved an application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC praying for amendment of the eviction petition by adding alleged ground of sub-letting of the tena...

Avtar Singh Narula S/O S. Sajjan Singh and Surinder Singh Manchanda S/ ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR2008Delhi177; 150(2008)DLT760; 2008(104)DRJ671

Manmohan Singh, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the appellants (Defendants in CS(OS) No1890/2006) against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 25th March, 2008 dismissing the application filed by the appellants being is No. 4827/2007 seeking rejection of plaint under Order 7, Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that Shri Sajjan Singh was lessee of shop No. 57, Khan Market, New Delhi, the Lesser being the Land & Development Officer (L&DO;). Shri Sajjan Singh, executed a registered will dated 25th June, 1964 at Bangkok bequeathing the above said property in favor of his son Shri Avtar Singh Narula, appellant No. 1. Appellant No. 2, Surender Singh Manchanda is an attorney of appellant No. 1. Shri Sajjan Singh died on 11th April, 1966 and left behind two more sons and a daughter besides appellant No. 1/ Shri Avtar Singh Narula.3. Appellant No. 2 on the basis of power of attorney entered into an agreement to sell dated 25th March...