Delhi Court October 2009 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Ms. Vandana Gyandhar Vs. Shri Pawan Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-2009
Reported in: (2010)157PLR8
Hima Kohli, J.1. Challenge in the present appeal is laid to the judgment dated 30.11.1999 passed in a suit instituted by the appellant (plaintiff in the court below) against the respondents for declaration and mandatory injunction. The aforesaid suit of the appellant was dismissed by the trial court on the ground that the same had been filed by concealing material facts. Before adverting to the pleas raised on behalf of both the parties, it would be appropriate to state in brief the facts of the case,2. The appellant married respondent No. 1 on 9.2.1992 in New Delhi and both, the parties stayed in Delhi till 12.8.1992, whereafter they left for U.S.A. to pursue higher studies. It is an admitted position that on 29.6.1995, a decree of dissolution of marriage of the appellant and the respondent No. l was granted by the Circuit Court of State of Oregon, United States of America. The appellant made an averment to the said effect in the plaint and stated that she did not join the proceedings...
Delhi Dayalbagh Coop. House Building Society Vs. Deputy Registrar, Reg ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2009
Reported in: 166(2010)DLT139
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against the order dated 26.02.2008 passed by the Delhi Cooperative Tribunal in Rev. P. No. 78/2008 as well as in the Appeal No. 226/2005-DCT which were heard together as common issues were involved.2. The respondent Society was given a piece of land by the then Delhi Administration by acquiring it under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by way of an agreement under Section 41 of the said Act. The land was acquired for the Society for construction of houses for its members and the agreement incorporated certain conditions to that effect. Thereafter, plots were carved out for its members and the same were allotted by the Society to its members by way of individual sale deeds executed between the Society and its members. The plot in question is plot No. A-2 in the said Society which was allotted to Lt Col. (Retd) Gurbans Singh and the sale deed was executed by the Society in favour of the said Lt Col. Gurbans Singh....
Home Developers Vs. Bhanu Sangwan and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2009
Reported in: 164(2009)DLT701
S. Ravindra Bhat, J.1. The parties were heard on the pending applications, I.A. Nos. 11209-10/2003; 4817/2005; 1400/ 2007; 9155/2007; 12186/2009 as well as maintainability of the suit.2. The suit claims specific performance of an agreement allegedly entered into by the plaintiff (hereafter called 'Home Developers') with the first defendant (hereafter called 'Ms. Bhanu Sangwan') on 24.08.2001. The subject matter of the agreement was the sale of the constructed first floor of property, built on C-545, Defence Colony, New Delhi, a 325 sq. yards plot (hereafter 'suit property'). The suit alleges that the total consideration agreed upon was Rs. One crore out of which a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs was paid on the date of the agreement; of the balance of Rs. 95 lakhs, Rs. 76 lakhs was agreed to be paid by the plaintiff within 15 days of signing of the agreement and at the time of taking clear, vacant and lawful possession of the terrace of the suit property; the remaining Rs. 19 lakhs was to be paid a...
Harish Chand, Ex. H.C S/O Late Sh. Krishan Chand Vs. Lt. Governor, Nat ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2009
Reported in: 164(2009)DLT659
Madan B. Lokur, J.1. The Petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 1st June, 2001 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench in OA No. 865/2000.2. The Petitioner was working as a Head Constable incharge of the Malkhana where the case property in criminal cases is kept. 3. It appears that the Petitioner handed over charge to his successor and later it came to the notice of the Respondents that some items were missing from the Malkhana. In fact the Petitioner had not deposited some items in the Malkhana but had misappropriated them. 4. On these broad facts, a departmental charge sheet dated 14th February, 1988 was issued to the Petitioner containing the following two charges:1. One motor-cycle made 'Yazdi' bearing regn. No. DEF-9364, chasis No. B-228215 engine No. BD-250-367537, colour black, was seized vide DD No. 30, dated 06.12.1984 PPP Vihar, PS Nangloi Under Section 60 DP Act, 1978 by HC Kartar Singh (IO) HC Harish Chand, No. 30/W failed to deposit the motor-cycl...
Bharat Catering Corporation Vs. Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Co ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2009
Reported in: 164(2009)DLT530
Reva Khetrapal, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 26th May, 2009 in OMP No. 281/2009 dismissing the petition filed by the appellant under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the aforesaid petition are as follows.3. The appellant claims to be a partnership firm under the name and style of M/s. Bharat Catering Corporation and is engaged in the business of running catering services. The appellant firm, initially constituted by a Deed of Partnership dated 26th April, 2005 between five partners, was awarded a catering contract by the respondents for providing mobile and static catering services to the respondents. Admittedly, it was one of the conditions of the tender that in case any change was made in the constitution of the firm, an approval would be sought from the respondents.4. During the subsistence of the contract, one of the partners of the appellant firm, namely...
Rakesh Kumar Gupta Vs. Mcd and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2009
Reported in: 164(2009)DLT53
Hima Kohli, J.1. The present appeal arises out of a judgment and decree dated 03.07.1999 passed by the trial court, dismissing the suit for permanent injunction filed by the appellant against the respondents, seeking to restrain them from dispossessing him or interfering in any manner with his physical possession over the land and structures in plots No. 13 and 14, measuring 600 sq. yards, part of Khasra No. 40/25 situated in the revenue estate of village Sameypur, Delhi.2. The case, as set out by the appellant in his plaint, was that he had come in possession of the aforesaid land in question in the year 1974, by way of adverse possession and since the year 1978, he had installed a petrol pump on the said land. It was averred that on 31.03.1997, the officials of respondents tried to forcibly dispossess the appellant from the land in question, thus compelling him to institute the suit for permanent injunction on 03.04.1997.3. On the very first day, i.e., on 04.04.1997, while issuing su...
Gangadhar Bajpai and ors. Vs. Ioc and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2009
Reported in: 164(2009)DLT265; (2010)ILLJ834Del
S.N. Aggarwal, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners who are 17 in number, for directions to the management of M/s Indian Oil Corporation (respondent No. 1 herein) that it should deposit their future provident fund and ESI contribution in its own account code to ensure that each one of them gets ESI card and other benefits.2. The petitioners were engaged as Security Guards by M/s Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) through contractors namely M/s Super Safeways Pvt. Ltd., M/s V.P.N. Security Agency and M/s Dev's Security. The petitioners who were contract employees had raised an industrial dispute being I.D. No. 130/1998 for their regularization by IOC (respondent No. 1). The dispute raised by the petitioners for their regularization was referred by the Central Government to the CGIT for adjudication. The terms of reference were as follows:Whether the demand of the Union that the services of the contract labourers namely, Sh. Prithvi Raj and others working as Securit...
Salman Khurshid Vs. Delhi Public School Society and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-27-2009
Reported in: 166(2010)DLT153
Manmohan Singh, J. 1. By this order, I shall dispose of I.A. No. 10680/2008 filed by the plaintiff in CS (OS) No. 1844/2008 wherein the plaintiff has sought the ex parte stay of operation of letter dated 1st September, 2008 and the confirmation of the said order after notice.2. The Plaintiff herein has filed the present suit for declaration and mandatory injunction seeking prohibitory orders against his expulsion from the Delhi Public School Society (hereinafter referred to as the 'defendant society.). By doing so, the plaintiff has assailed the letter issued by the Chairman of the defendant society on 1st September, 2008 through which the plaintiff was informed of the reasons for his expulsion and thereafter called upon to withdraw from the society by invocation of Rule II(7) of Rules and Regulations of the defendant society. The plaintiff has challenged the said letter dated 1st September, 2008 on several grounds in the present suit. Along with the suit, the plaintiff filed the prese...
Tata Sons Ltd. Vs. Tata Industrial Recruitment
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-27-2009
Reported in: 164(2009)DLT95; 2009(41)PTC753(Del)
Manmohan Singh, J.1. The plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off, damages and rendition of accounts and delivery up against the defendant. The case of the Plaintiff is that the Plaintiff company was established in the year 1917 as a body corporate and is the principal investment holding company of TATA, which is India's oldest, largest and best - known conglomerate, with a turnover of over US$21 billion or Rs. 96,000 crores for the financial year 2005-06. Its genesis came from the surname of its founder Jamsethi Nusserwanji Tata, and the same has become synonymous with excellence in almost every field of business activity.2. The enterprises promoted by the Plaintiff company have laid the foundation in the industrial core sectors, pioneering the textiles, steel, power, chemicals, hotels and transport industries in India.3. As per the plaintiff, since its inception in 1917, the plaintiff has been continuously and consistently u...
Smt. Anita Mittal Sole Proprietor of Amog Creations and Amog Creations ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-27-2009
Reported in: 164(2009)DLT418
V.B. Gupta, J.1. Present appeal has been filed by appellants under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short as 'Act'), against judgment dated 28th May, 2007 passed by Additional District Judge, Delhi, vide which objections preferred by appellants against ex parte award dated 12th September, 2002, were dismissed.2. Brief facts are that respondent No. 1-claimant, filed claim against appellants before Arbitrator. Arbitrator sent summons to both parties. Claimant appeared before Arbitrator, whereas, appellants did not appear. The Arbitrator proceeded ex parte against appellants. After considering the claim of claimant, Arbitrator passed an award in his favour, on 12th September, 2002.3. It is contended by learned Counsel for appellants that as per Arbitration clause, both parties had to jointly approach Delhi Hindustani Mercantile Association or the Arbitral Tribunal, appointed by them for settlement in case of any disputes regarding payment etc. In the present case,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »