Delhi Court March 2010 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2010 Page 10 of about 197 results (0.019 seconds)Sh. Ravinder Kumar Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Anil Kumar, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 1st June, 2009 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. No. 1479/2009 titled Ravinder Kumar v. Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors. dismissing his petition seeking direction to reinstate the petitioner after he was appointed on compassionate ground and his appointment was terminated by the order dated 10th July, 2008, 18th November, 2008 and 1st June, 2009 on petitioner failing to qualify the basic training.2. Brief facts to comprehend the controversies are that father of the petitioner had died on 9th December, 2003 while in service and an application was filed by petitioner's mother for his appointment on compassionate ground which was allowed in an original application filed by the petitioner being O.A. No. 1231/2005 titled Ravinder Kumar v. Government of NCT of Delhi by the order dated 26th September, 2006 directing the respondent to reconsider the case of the petitioner for compa...
Tag this Judgment!iTi Certificate Holders' Association (Regd.) and Anr. Vs. Delhi Transp ...
Court: Delhi
Mool Chand Garg, J.1. The petitioners herein are aggrieved by the orders dated 07.10.2009 and 20.11.2009 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal') in TA No. 1167/2009 and TA No. 1481/2009 respectively, whereby the learned Tribunal has dismissed both the transfer applications.2. The petitioners herein prays for grant of pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000/- as recommended to their category as per Central Pay Commission Report/Recommendation which was made effective by the Central Government and the State Government with respect to similar categories with effect from 1.1.1996 based upon the report given by a Sub-Committee constituted by the DTC Board as per Resolution No. 90 of 2000 regarding existence of anomalies in the pay scale of officers/officials of DTC on 26.09.2001 wherein it was recommended by the Sub-Committee that A/Elect, A/Fitter, A/Painter, A/Blacksmith, A/Body Fitter, A/Welder, A/Machinist, A/Tinsmith, Tyre-man and A/Bench...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Sarfaraj Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. While admitting the appeal on 24.2.2010, consent of learned Counsel for the parties was noted that printing of the paper book be dispensed with and appeal be listed for final hearing today in the category of 'After Notice Miscellaneous Matters'.2. Trial court record has been received and arguments have been heard.3. Vide impugned judgment and order dated 22.12.2009, appellant Mohd.Sarfaraj has been held guilty of murdering Mst. Rehana, wife of Salim, at around 8:40 AM on 7.8.2005 at the second floor of house bearing municipal number C-1/75, Second Floor, Raju Park, Delhi.4. That the appellant was a tenant in a room on the second floor of house number C-1/75, Raju Park, Delhi and that the deceased along with her husband and daughter were also residing as a tenant in another room on the second floor of the same building are facts which have not been disputed before us by learned Counsel for the appellant. Indeed, the appellant has admitted said facts, evidenced by...
Tag this Judgment!Central Board of Secondary Education Vs. Ramayana Press
Court: Delhi
Valmiki J. Mehta, J.1. By this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner M/s Central Board of Secondary Education challenges the Award of the sole Arbitrator dated 19.12.2003 only with respect to the aspect of grant of labour wastage/idle labour charges to the respondent. The Arbitrator has awarded an amount of Rs. 1, 05,000/-to the respondent/claimant under this claim.2. Under the contract, the petitioner supplied paper to the respondent and the respondent was to convert the paper into answer sheets and re-supply them back to the petitioner. The respondent alleged that on account of delay in supply of the paper, it suffered loss due to idle labour and therefore this claim was filed before the Arbitrator along with other claims. The Arbitrator has allowed this claim by giving the below mentioned reasoning:Even during the proceeding before the High Court or while filing the claim before the Arbitrator it was not felt necessary by the Claiman...
Tag this Judgment!Anjum and ors. Vs. Rakesh JaIn and ors.
Court: Delhi
J.R. Midha, J.1. The appellants have challenged the awards of the Claims Tribunal seeking enhancement of the award amount.2. The accident dated 21st April, 2008 resulted in the death of nine persons travelling in Tata-407 bearing No. UP-14T-9962 which had head-on collision with bus bearing No. DL-1PB-6849 whereupon Tata tempo overturned resulting in nine deaths of the occupants. The legal representatives of the nine deceased persons filed separate claim petitions before the Claims Tribunal.3. The rash and negligent driving of the bus was proved by PW-8 who was travelling in Tata-407 and was sitting in the front cabin. PW-8 deposed that the bus bearing No. DL-1PB-6849 was being driven in a rash and negligent manner and it hit the Tata tempo due to which the Tata tempo overturned and the occupants fell down on the road resulting in the death of nine persons. PW-4 further deposed that the criminal case was registered against the driver of the bus. The Claims Tribunal gave a finding that t...
Tag this Judgment!Sidharth Sareen and anr. Vs. Hira Realtors Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 2010(168)ELT621(Del)
Mukta Gupta, J.1. The plaintiffs/Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 herein (hereinafter called 'the contesting Respondents') filed a suit being CS (OS) No. 260/2008 inter alia praying as under:A) Declare that the Forms filed by the Defendants with the Registrar of Companies, as mentioned herein above, are invalid, illegal and null and void;B) Grant permanent injunction against the defendants restraining them from acting, representing and/or holding out themselves as directors/shareholders of plaintiff No. 1 company;C) Grant permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering or dealing with in any manner with the affairs, business and properties of the plaintiff company, andD) Pass such other and further order/orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit, proper and necessary on the facts and circumstances of the present case.2. Subsequently, an application being IA No. 5611/2008 was filed by the contesting Respondents under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC for the amendment of the plaint. Aft...
Tag this Judgment!State N.C.T. of Delhi Vs. Sonu
Court: Delhi
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. The State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 24.09.2008.2. Vide impugned judgment the learned Trial Judge has acquitted the respondent of the charge punishable under Section 376/506 IPC.3. Prosecutrix PW-1 and her mother PW-2 have been disbelieved by the learned trial Judge.4. With reference to the observations of the learned Trial Judge in para 21 of the impugned decision, learned Counsel for the State urges that it is apparent that the learned Trial Judge has been greatly influenced by the fact that the witnesses of the prosecution i.e. PW-1, PW-2 and PW-10 were related to each other and independent witness has not been examined. It is pointed out that the learned Trial Judge has also been influenced by the fact that the social conduct of PW-2 i.e. mother of the prosecutrix PW-1, was not good and for said reason, learned Counsel urges, testimony of PW-2 has not been correctly appreciated. Lastly, it is urged that assuming that the prose...
Tag this Judgment!Chikoo and anr. Vs. Rakesh JaIn and ors.
Court: Delhi
J.R. Midha, J.1. The appellants have challenged the award of the Claims Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs. 1,71,500/- has been awarded to the appellants. The appellants seek enhancement of the award amount.2. The accident dated 21st April, 2008 resulted in the death of nine persons travelling in Tata-407 bearing No. UP-14T-9962 which had head-on collision with bus bearing No. DL-1PB-6849 whereupon Tata tempo overturned resulting in nine deaths of the occupants. The legal representatives of the nine deceased persons filed separate claim petitions before the Claims Tribunal.3. The rash and negligent driving of the bus was proved by PW-8 who was travelling in Tata-407 and was sitting in the front cabin. PW-8 deposed that the bus bearing No. DL-1PB-6849 was being driven in a rash and negligent manner and it hit the Tata tempo due to which the Tata tempo overturned and the occupants fell down on the road resulting in the death of nine persons. PW-4 further deposed that the criminal case w...
Tag this Judgment!Delhi Development Authority Vs. Sukhjinder Singh Bhatia
Court: Delhi
Mukta Gupta, J.CM No. 4996/2010 (condonation of delay) & LPA No. 195/20101. The present appeal is accompanied by an application for condonation of delay, wherein, the Appellant states that the delay of 190 days in filing of the appeal occurred as the file got tagged up with the other files of the Appellant and it could not be noticed that the same was for drafting of the appeal. It is only when the notice in a contempt petition was received, it was found that the appeal was not drafted, as it was tagged along with the other files of the Appellant authority, causing delay in filing of the present appeal. In view of the facts stated, the delay in filing of the appeal is condoned.2. Ironically, the Appellant seeks condonation of delay in filing of the appeal, however, on merits contends that the Respondent's writ petition should have been dismissed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on delay and laches.3. In the present appeal the Appellant challenges the order dated 27th July, 200...
Tag this Judgment!Rajesh Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Gita Mittal, J.1. Rule DB.2. Learned Counsel for the respondents accepts notice and waives formal notice. It is contended by the parties that the matter involves a short issue and may be disposed of on the basis of the available material which has been placed on record alongwith the writ petition. Learned Counsel for the respondents has also kept available the original record of the case which has been perused by us.3. So far as the material facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are concerned, there is no real dispute to the same and to the extent necessary, they are noticed hereafter. The petitioner has filed the present petition aggrieved by a notice of termination dated 29th July, 2007 and the termination order dated 19th August, 2007 based thereon as per the counter affidavit at page 45 of the paper book.4. The petitioner was born on 10th May, 1986. He had applied for appointment to the post of Constable with the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF for brevity her...
Tag this Judgment!