Delhi Court December 2010 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2010 Page 2 of about 211 results (0.023 seconds)Prithi Pal Singh and ors. Vs. Lieutenant Governor and ors.
Court: Delhi
1. The petitioners purchased land measuring 5 bighas and 2 biswas in khasra no.42/2 situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Humayupur along with some built up structure vide a sale deed dated 19.10.1951.2. It is the claim of the petitioners that they constructed a bunglow and an ice factory on their land and with the passage of time, an unauthorized colony known as Krishna Nagar Colony came up on the adjoining land. The petitioners claim that their land is also a part of the lay out plan of the said unauthorized colony which had been regularized by the respondents vide Resolution No. 62 dated 25.06.1981. A notification was issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the said Act for short) on 03.09.1957 which included the lands falling in Khasra no.42 of which the land of the petitioners being khasra no.42/2 was a part.3. In the meantime, the DDA was constituted under the Delhi Development Act, 1957 and MPD-1962 came into force on 01.09.1962. A declaration under Section...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Puri Vs. Radhey Lal and ors.
Court: Delhi
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? No2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the Judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes 1. This Appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 21.8.2006 whereby the learned Single Judge rejected the Suit filed by the Appellant praying for the Specific Performance of a purported agreement entered into on 16.6.2003. This alleged agreement pertains to the sale of a Ground Floor Flat owned by the Defendant/Respondent.2. The document, on which the Suit is founded, is handwritten, inexorably leading to the conclusion that it was drawn on the spur of the moment. It is reproduced below:- 3. In the impugned Order, the learned Single Judge has arrived at the conclusion, after noticing Section 2(h) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 and Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, that an enforceable contract had been arrived at by the parties. This appears to be predicated on the dialectic that in the...
Tag this Judgment!Manvir Singh and Rakesh @ Raju and Another Vs. State
Court: Delhi
1. Above referred appeals are directed against the impugned judgment dated 25.01.1997 of Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions case No.202/93, FIR No.105/88, P.S. Shakarpur finding the appellants Manvir Singh, Rakesh Kumar, Mukesh Kumar and co-accused Manjeet Singh guilty of murder of Ashwani Kumar in furtherance of their common intention and also holding the appellant Rakesh Kumar @ Raju guilty of offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act and convicting them accordingly as also against the consequent order on sentence dated 29.01.1997 in terms of which the appellants have been awarded sentence for the respective offences committed by them.2. Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that on 12.5.1988 at about 9.55 p.m., some unknown person telephonically intimated P.S. Shakarpur about a stabbing incident at Sarojini Park, Shastri Nagar, Delhi. This information was recorded as DD No.20A (Ex.PW21/DA). Copy of the DD report was entrusted to ASI Gian Singh, PW15 for taking nece...
Tag this Judgment!Walchandnagar Industries Ltd. Vs. Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd.
Court: Delhi
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the Judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes 1. The facts germane for a decision in these Appeals are that in respect of a Sugar Mill Project to be established in Ethiopia, funding has been made available by the Government of India through the aegis of EXIM Bank. The Project has been sub divided into seven sub-projects for which separate and independent tenders were floated. These are (1) Steam Generation (2) Process House (3) Juice Extraction (4) Power Generation (5) Diesel Generation (6) Factory Workshop and (7) Plant Water System. It was further decided that for ease and facility of implementation of the Project, instead of dealing separately with all the successful Tenderers, the Tenderer who had been awarded the largest number of projects, would act as the lead party; a single Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) contract would be ent...
Tag this Judgment!Meroform (India) Pvt. Ltd Vs. the Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
1. The Apparel Export Promotion Council (for short AEPC), respondent No.2 invited tenders in July, 2010 for engaging an event management agency for the International Trade Fair, Tex-Styles India-2011, to be held in February, 2011at Pragati Maidan, New Delhi. The petitioner applied in pursuance to the tenders floated in this regard. The bid process envisaged two stages of evaluation, i.e. technical bid and the financial bid.2. The scope of activities for which the bid was invited included designing of logo, registration counter, stall construction, parking, signage/hoarding, audio-visual equipments, communication of the event, cafeteria, security, housekeeping, local transport for buyers, photograph, printing and mailing activities. The bids were evaluated based on the parameters fixed by the respondents. The petitioner was selected for award of the work, the total cost of the project being estimated at `17.44 crore. The petitioner claimed management fee of 12.5 per cent of the total ex...
Tag this Judgment!Jindal Photo Ltd. Vs. Jai Mahaveer Colour Lab and anr.
Court: Delhi
1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs.33,09,614/-. The case of the plaintiff is that it supplied two Mini Labs to defendant No.2 on lease for a period of four years commencing from May, 1996 and ending in April, 2000. Defendant No.2 is stated to be carrying business under the name and style of defendant No.1 Jai Mahaveer Colour Lab. The combined lease rent of the two Mini Labs supplied to the defendants is alleged to be Rs.1,11,987.53p per month. It is further alleged that the defendants were required to pay a sum of Rs.14,15,847/- to the plaintiff towards security deposit and Rs.67,893/- towards lease management fee. The plaintiff has also claimed a sum of Rs.27,482/- from the defendants towards price of the spares supplied to them. The amount of total monthly rent payable by the defendants to the plaintiff is stated to be Rs.53,75,427/-. Adding the amount of security deposit, lease management fee and price of spares, the total amount comes to Rs.69,25,649/-. The case of the plaintiff ...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Rohit Shekhar Vs. Shri Narayan Dutt Tiwari and anr.
Court: Delhi
1. The plaintiff by this application seeks a direction to the first defendant to furnish blood samples for enabling the DNA testing.2. Briefly, the facts are that the plaintiff claims a decree for declaration that the first defendant is his biological father. The second defendant (hereafter referred to as Ujjawala Sharma) is the plaintiffs mother. Apparently, he (first defendant) was a Member of Parliament during the period 1967-1980. It is contended that Ujjawala Sharma was active in politics and involved in activities of All India Young Woman Congress apart from her job as Sanskrit Lecturer at Daulat Ram College. The plaintiff also contends that Ujjawala Sharma was previously married to Sh. B.P. Sharma from whom she was estranged. Apparently, she and her husband Sh. B.P. Sharma had a son Siddhartha Sharma. The plaintiff contends that the first defendant did not have any child from his marriage, and, as he was very fond of Ujjawala Sharma and even wanted to marry her, he convinced her...
Tag this Judgment!Hc Munshi Lal . Vs. Commissioner of Police and ors.
Court: Delhi
1. The above-captioned two writ petitions challenge the judgment and order dated 6.1.2010 as also the judgment and order dated 18.3.2010 passed in OA No.174/2008 and OA No.309/2008. Vide order dated 6.1.2010 both Original Applications were dismissed and vide order dated 18.3.2010, two applications seeking review of the order dated 6.1.2010 were dismissed.2. 5 officers of the Delhi Police; namely, HC Munshi Lal, Ct. Surinder Singh, Ct. Ram Singhasan, Ct. Shrimant and Ct. Banwari Lal were informed by a memorandum dated 22.2.2005 that on the indictment listed therein an inquiry would be conducted under the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules 1980 and that Insp.Ravinder Kumar would be functioning as the Inquiry Officer. The order reads as under:-"OFFICE OF THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF POLICE:NEW DELHI DISTT.DELHIORDERIt is alleged against HC Munshi Lal No.408/ND (PIS No.28891382) Consts. Surender Singh No.590/ND (PlS No.28883811), Ram Singhasan No.1303/ND (PIS No.28960229), Shrimant No.1296...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Chadha Engineering Works
Court: Delhi
1. The short controversy that arise in the present Appeal is whether Section 39 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 (Act for short) provides for an Appeal against the order of dismissal of a suit for making an Award the Rule of Court on the ground that the filing of the Award in the Court was unauthorized and was also barred by the principles of prescription.2. An Award came to be passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator, Shri R.N. Poddar on 9.8.1996 and the Notice of the same was issued to both the parties on the very same day. However, the Award came to be filed in the Court by Shri S.B. Sharan (who was not the Sole Arbitrator in the case). The filing of the Award was also delayed by many months, and hence was in violation of Sections 14 and 17 of the Act. On an Application being made by Respondent under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC for short), the learned Single Judge was pleased to reject the Suit for being in contravention to provisions of the Act, in t...
Tag this Judgment!Uoi Vs. A.K.Singh and anr
Court: Delhi
1. The facts are not in dispute and thus we note the agreed statement of facts. First respondent Sh.A.K.Singh was an officer of the Goa Police Service and in terms of the Indian Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations 1955 was entitled to be considered for appointment by promotion to the Indian Police Service in the Goa Quota allocable in the IPS Service pertaining to the state of Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, Mizoram and the Union Territories. On being appointed by promotion as an officer of the Indian Police Service, his seniority was liable to be fixed in accordance with Rule 3 of the Indian Police Service (Regulation of Seniority) Rules 1988.2. Regulation 5 of the 1955 Regulations in force till it was amended in the year 2000 when the second proviso was added thereto, reads as under:-"5. PREPARATION OF A LIST OF SUITABLE OFFICERS:-(1) Each Committee shall ordinarily meet every year and prepare a list of such members of the State Police Service as are held by them to be suit...
Tag this Judgment!