Delhi Court July 2011 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.
Zulfiquar Khan Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. The present writ petition challenges the order dated 25.11.1997 passed by the Appellate Authority, Deputy Director General, CISF (WZ) whereby the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed and the order dated 30.6.1997 of the Commandant, CISF, Unit IPCL, Baroda, whereby penalty of 'removal from service' imposed upon the petitioner was upheld. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was working as a Constable with CISF at its IPCL Unit, Baroda. He was sanctioned earned leave from 8th July-22nd July 1996. During the period of the leave, vide letter dated 17.7.1996 petitioner sought extension of leave for 45 days on medical grounds. The Commandant responded informing the petitioner that he should get himself examined at the nearest Government hospital and obtain and submit a medical certificate pertaining to his alleged sickness and further that the medical certificate should be from the date of admission till discharge from the hospital and should evidence that the petition...
Shri Amar Lal Arora Vs. Smt.Shashi Bala
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. By this appeal filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 the appellant husband seeks to challenge the judgment and decree dated 05.02.2001 passed by the learned trial court whereby the divorce petition filed by the appellant herein under Section 13 (1) (ia) & (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act was dismissed. 2. Brief facts of the case relevant for deciding the present appeal are that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 13.02.1987 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies and a daughter 'Gudia' was born from the wedlock on 5.1.1988 . The case set up by the appellant in the divorce petition was that the respondent was under the influence of her parents right from the beginning of the marriage and her parents interfered in their affairs. It was also alleged that the respondent never showed happiness in residing with the appellant and never fulfilled her matrimonial obligations. It was also the case of the appellant that the respondent avoided normal sexual lif...
Ramesh Gupta Vs. Dinanath Mahajan and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. The plaintiff claims to be General Secretary of defendant No.3 Akhil Bharatiya Mahajan Shiromani. The case of the plaintiff is that he was duly elected as General Secretary of defendant No.3-Sabha in the elections held on 30th May 2010. This is also the case of the plaintiff that defendant No.1 Sh. Dinanath Mahajan, who at present is the President of defendant No.3 has nominated defendasnt No.2 as the General Secretary of defendant No.3, in contravention of the constitution of the Sabha and despite the plaintiff having already been elected as its General Secretary in the conference of Sabha held on 30th May 2010. The plaintiff has, therefore, sought an injunction restraining defendant No.2 from holding himself out as the General Secretary of defendant No.3 and has also sought an injunction restraining defendant No.1 from appointing any person as General Secretary of defendant No.3. 2. The suit has been contested by the defendants. The plead taken by the defendants is that the plaint...
Hc Shripal Singh Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. Let us note the undisputed facts. 2. Vide Policy Circular No.1/2008 dated 28.1.2008, CISF has notified, guidelines pertaining to transfer of its force personnel. 3. Pertaining to those force personnel who are assigned 'North Zone' the policy stipulates that their tenure would be divided in 4 components. First tenure; of 8 years would require these officers to serve in Units in out of home zone. Thereafter, the second tenure would require these officers to be deputed in units within their home zone. The third tenure requires the officers to be posted in units out of home zone for 8 years, and the last being the 4th tenure would require these officers to be stationed within the home zone. 4. But, the policy clearly noted that as per Section 15 of CISF Act 1968, since every member of a force has an all India liability to serve, on administrative grounds and in the interest of operational efficiency of the force a force personnel can be posted anywhere in India, irrespective of the guid...
Nafe Singh and ors. Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. Vide two separate judgments dated 10.08.2009 and 28.09.2009, the learned Reference Court has dismissed 3 land acquisition references, holding that no case was made out to enhance the compensation awarded by the learned Land Acquisition Collector. 2. Lands in the Revenue Estate of village Kamruddin Nagar were acquired by a common award pursuant to a notification dated 30.05.1990 issued under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act. 3. The impugned decision would reveal, as also the award, that the compensation was assessed with reference to the minimum price of agricultural land notified by the Government with respect to the date 30.05.1990. The same is `4,65,000/- per acre i.e. `96,875/- per bigha. 4. A perusal of the impugned decisions further reveals that the land owners had relied upon photo copies of 2 agreements to sell dated 8.7.1986 and 15.08.1987, Ex.PW2/1 and Ex.PW2/3, respectively. The land owners had also relied upon 3 sale deeds; each pertaining to 1 Bigha land sold in the Rev...
Om Prakash Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. The petitioner challenges the judgment and order dated 19.1.2010 dismissing OA No.24/2009 filed before the Armed Forces Tribunal. 2. Relevant facts to be noted are that vide para 12 of Air Force Order No.12/S/48, as amended from time to time, initial term of engagement for Airman is 20 years. Vide Air Force Order dated 13.8.1999, vide para 2, it is stipulated that the initial term of engagement may be extended till 26 years, but the same shall be at the discretion of such officer to whom the power is delegated. 3. Vide para 4(b) of the said Air Force Order it is stipulated that the option to extend the engagement, and the converse, unwillingness for service to be extended must reach the concerned officer at least 18 months prior to the expiry of the term of the regular engagement. It is also stipulated therein that option once exercised would be treated as final except under very exceptional and extreme compassionate grounds could be withdrawn. 4. Suffice would it be to state that e...
Smt. Yashwanti and ors. Vs. Sh. Ishwar Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. The appellants in this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seek enhancement of the compensation amount awarded to them by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal by its judgment and award dated 16th April, 2002 passed in Claim Petition No. 134/96. 2. The facts relevant for the decision of the present appeal are that one Rajender Prasad Chauhan died in a road accident on 16.12.1995, leaving behind his widow and three children. The deceased was employed in Government Co-Ed. Secondary School, Barwala, Delhi and was earning ` 7,346/- per month. A claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was filed by his aforesaid legal representatives claiming a sum of ` 10,00,000/- by way of compensation for his untimely demise. The learned Claims Tribunal after appraisal of the evidence on record including the pay certificates produced from the school, Exhibit PW1/A and Exhibit P1, showing his income as ` 7,346/- per month, proceeded to calculate the compensation to...
Roshan Lal Vs. Uoi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. Above captioned appeals pertain to acquisition of agricultural lands comprised in the revenue estate of village Baprola. Acquisition commenced pursuant to a notification dated 12.8.1997 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. 2. As per award No.5/DCW/2000-01, the Land Acquisition Collector categorized the acquired lands into Block A and Block B. He determined fair market value of Block A lands at `2,08,383/- per bigha and Block B lands at `1,77,083/- per bigha. 3. Land owners sought reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and for reasons which are not very commendable, the learned Reference Court decided the references by passing orders on different dates. 4. The orders by which references have been decided are dated 25.8.2006, 28.8.2006, 29.8.2006, 30.8.2006, 31.8.2006, 19.9.2006, 22.9.2006, 29.9.2006 and 30.10.2006. 5. I would note that all orders have been passed by the same Judge. It is apparent that the learned Judge deciding the references was more c...
Rajesh Kumar Gouhari Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. By way of this petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash memorandum no. 11(181)/96-D&AR-II dated 19th August, 2008 and the departmental proceedings arising out of the same. The petitioner has also prayed for grant of appropriate compensation to him from the respondents for causing the alleged harassment and mental agony to him. 2. Briefly the facts relevant for disposal of the present writ petition are as under:- Petitioner was appointed as Assistant Manager (Internal Audit) with respondent no.2 on 12.05.1996 and has been working there since then. It is alleged that petitioner had raised certain issues about the wrong doings of some of the higher-ups of respondent no.2 due to which he was transferred to Bangalore on 18th February, 2005. The petitioner had challenged the said transfer order by filing a writ petition before this court i.e. WP(C) 8516/2005. Some interim orders w...
Dr. P.N. Shukla and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-15-2011
1. Dr. P.N. Shukla and five others have filed the present writ petition assailing orders dated 1st June, 2010 and 3rd August, 2010 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (Tribunal, for short), dismissing their O.A. No. 1762/2010 and Review Application No. 203/2010. 2. The petitioners herein are working as Assistant Scientific Officers in the Commission for Scientific & Technical Terminology. The dispute does not pertain to their posts or their pay-scale. The dispute also does not pertain to the service conditions as applicable to them. The grievance raised by the petitioners is that Dr. Bhim Sen Behere, respondent No. 4 herein, Assistant Scientific Officer (Medicine) has been wrongly given designation and declared as an ex-cadre post and granted upgradation of pay-scale to Rs.8000-13500 (pre-revised) whereas the pay-scale of the petitioners is Rs.7500-12000 (pre-revised). 3. In the impugned order dated 1st June, 2010, Tribunal has noticed that thi...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »