Delhi Court August 2008 Judgments

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kusum Mishra and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2009ACJ1959

Kailash Gambhir, J.1. By way of the present appeal, the appellant seeks to challenge the impugned award dated 18.5.2005 mainly on the ground that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is quite excessive and exorbitant and totally unrelated to the claim set up and proved by the respondents-claimants.In brief, the facts of the case are that on 24.11.2000 at about 11 p.m. the deceased Hem Chandra Mishra was going on the two-wheeler scooter towards Karala on the road from Avantika to Karala and when he reached in front of Brahm Shakti Hospital on Budh Vihar-Kanjhawala Road, Delhi, the truck bearing registration No. DIL 220 which was being driven at a very fast speed, in a rash and negligent manner and on the wrong side of the road, came and hit the two-wheeler scooter bearing registration No. DL 8S-K 0270 of the deceased from the front side and Mishra fell down and the wheel of the truck ran over his head and he died on the spot. The accident occurred on account of rash and ne...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Pramod Kumar Gupta

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [2010]320ITR408(Delhi)

1. This appeal pertains to the block period April 1, 1996, to October 4, 2002. The Assessing Officer had found undisclosed investment in property. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleted the addition made on the said basis. This was confirmed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal by its impugned order. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had explained the investment in the property by declaring it in the return of income before the date of search and the same had been accepted in the assessment made under Section 143(3) after the date of search, i.e., February 26, 2004. The Tribunal further noted that it is also not in dispute that no material was found during search to indicate that any undisclosed investment for the block period had been made in the property. The Tribunal was of the view that the block assessment could only be made on the basis of evidence found during search and/or any other material or information relatable to such evidence. The Tribunal held that in this ...

Subodh C. Gupta (Dr.) and Another Vs. Scandinavian Airlines Systems

Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

J.D. Kapoor, President (Oral): 1. Complainants are U.S. citizens. They had purchased two round trip tickets from Delhi in the business class on May 15, 1999 bearing No. 117-6894467851-54 with flight sectors as Delhi-Copenhagen-Newark-Copenhagen-Nice-Copenhagen-Delhi. On this sector-2 checked in baggages are allowed with maximum weights of 64 kgs. On May 23, 2000 the complainant boarded the SAS flight at Newark at 18.15 hours and checked their luggage. At the time of receiving the baggage from the complainants no objection was raised by the OP and the baggage was cleared since it was found within the permissible limits. The baggage was received at Copenhagen Airport. Except for the bare minimum required by the complainants the rest of their luggage was deposited in the left luggage facility as the complainants were proceeding to Nice for few days. The complainants boarded the SAS flight from Copenhagen to Nice at 10.45 hrs on May 24th 2000. In Nice they did not check in their baggage. T...

Shri Ajay Kumar S/O Late Shri J.P. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) Throug ...

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. By this OA applicant has challenged order dated 31.1.2007 (page 17) whereby his request for compassionate appointment has been rejected. He has further sought a direction to the respondents to give appointment of Postal Assistant to the applicant on compassionate ground with all consequential benefits in view of the recommendation made by the Circle Relaxation Committee (hereinafter referred to as CRC) and approval granted by the Chief Postmaster General UP Circle Lucknow vide letter dated 29.7.1999. More so when he has been imparted the prescribed practical and Institutional training also of 3.1/2 months and had completed all other pre-appointment formalities.2. It is submitted by the applicant that his father died in harness on 17.12.1998. He applied for compassionate appointment. CRC recommended that he should be appointed as Postal Assistant as he fulfilled the educational qualification and belonged to SC. Even Chief Post Master General (hereinafter referred to as CPMG) accorde...

P.D. Khanna and ors. Vs. Ashwani Khanna and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 152(2008)DLT544

S. Muralidhar, J.1. These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 15th March 2002 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing OMP Nos. 71 and 93 of 1999 filed by the Appellants challenging an Award dated 1st January 1999.2. The background to the filing of the present appeal are that an arbitration agreement dated 4th September 1996 was entered into by the members of the 'Khanna Family' whereby the disputes concerning distribution of the properties amongst them were referred for arbitration by a Sole Arbitrator Mr. Navinpal Singh Bhandari. There are five groups in the Khanna family. Group A is headed by Mr. P.D. Khanna, Group B by Mr. L.R. Khanna, Group C by Mr. Y.P. Khanna, Group-D is represented by Mr. Ashwani Khanna son of late Mr. O.P. Khanna and Group E by Mr. P.P. Khanna. The disputes related to the distribution of 17 different immoveable properties as well as the assets of the businesses run by the different groups. The incidental issues concerning the liabilities of th...

Mukesh Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 152(2008)DLT201; 2008(105)DRJ303

Vikramajit Sen, J.1. We are concerned with the rampant manipulation and misuse of the statutory right to appeal by convicts who quite palpably take recourse to filing of appeals with the sole objective of defeating justice by obtaining bail and thereafter escaping out of the reach of law. Jural compulsions dictate that this species of appeals should be consciously dismissed on the ground of occasioning gross abuse of judicial process and an annihilation of the ends of justice. This approach has found favour with the High Courts of Bombay and Patna. It is necessary to distinguish between dismissal of appeals in this set of circumstances, namely, where steps have been taken for securing the presence of the appellant by coercive means, including the issuance of non-bailable warrants or proceedings for declaring the appellant a proclaimed offender by recourse to Part C of Chapter VI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC for short) on the one hand, and instances where the appellant ...

Rita Handa Vs. Cbi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 152(2008)DLT248; 2008(105)DRJ331

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.1. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India (GOI) selected M/s Rail India Technical and Economic Services ('M/s RITES' for short) as a consultant for services including procurement and supply of Vitamin 'A' solution to various states of the country, finalizing of tenders and other related activities during the year 1997-98. M/s RITES invited bids and accepted the tender of M/s Reliance Bulk Drugs and Formulations Ltd. (for short 'M/s RBDFL') and entered into a contract for the supply of 33136 units @ Rs. 419.64 per unit of a specified quality.2. It is stated that at the initial stage itself M/s RBDFL submitted forged bank guarantee B.G. No. BG/1219 dated 19-09-1997 along with forged BG extension covering letters signed by one Shri V.K. Chawla, Managing Director, M/s RBDFL (accused no. 3) and Atul Gupta, Assistant General Manager, M/s RBDFL (accused no. 4) on behalf of M/s RBDFL (accused no. 5) to the Ministry. The aforesaid documents were mar...

Ritu Sengupta and Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 152(2008)DLT68; 2008(106)DRJ54

Sanjiv Khanna, J.1. Arguments on the above two writ petitions were heard together and as similar legal issues arise for consideration, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The property involved in Writ Petition(Civil) No. 8219/2006 is HS-11, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Panchsheel Property, for short) and the property involved in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 12758/2005 is C-6/5, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Vasant Vihar Property, for short).3. By assessment order dated 1st July, 1999, annual rateable value of the Panchsheel Property was fixed at Rs.17,14,580/-. Similarly, by assessment order dated 1st April, 2002, annual rateable value of Vasant Vihar Property was fixed at Rs.6,12,000/- with effect from 1st April, 1998, Rs.10,45,500/- with effect from 1st April, 1999, Rs.11,22,000/- from 10th October, 1999 and Rs.11,31,300/- from 10th April, 2000. It is admitted by the petitioners that the rateable value so fixed we...

Sh. Jitender Singh S/O Shri Ram Singh Vs. Smt. Yashwanti W/O Shri Jite ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: II(2008)DMC483

V.B. Gupta, J.1. The present appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short as the 'Act') has been filed against the judgment dated 24.11.06 passed by Ms. Anju Bajaj Chandna, Delhi vide which, the Trial Court has dismissed the divorce petition filed by the Appellant/Husband under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act on the ground of cruelty, by holding that Respondent/Wife has not committed any cruelty upon the Appellant so as to grant the decree of dissolution of marriage.2. The brief facts of this case are that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 26.02.01 at Delhi as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. After the marriage, parties lived and cohabited in the matrimonial home, but no issue was born to them. 3. Later on, there started differences between the parties. It is alleged by the Appellant that on 03.03.01, the mother of the Respondent created scene in the matrimonial home of the Respondent at village Chamarian in Rohtak on an inconsequential issue of birth...

Mr. Paramjit Singh @ Pammi Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 154(2008)DLT524

Manmohan, J.1. The present appeal has been filed seeking to set aside the judgment and order dated 19th October, 1993 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi Mr. Kuldeep Singh arising out of FIR No. 42/1988 registered with PS Hauz Quazi, Delhi.2. Relevant facts of this case are that on 21st February, 1988 at about 2 pm when SHO Mr. Ram Singh Chauhan PW-3 along with ASI Ajit Singh, Investigating Officer PW-8 were on patrolling duty, they received secret information that a sardar carrying smack wearing a black coloured turban and coca cola coloured jersey, would come from Jama Masjid's side and proceed towards Farash Khana.3. At about 2.20 pm a raiding party was formed and a nakabandi of the area was carried out. The prosecution's version is that a number of passersby were asked to join the raiding party as independent witnesses, but as the shops in the area were closed on account of holiday only Mr. Gopal Singh PW-4, a TSR Driver agreed to join the raiding party.4. At about 2...