Delhi Court August 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.
Surender Tomar Vs. D.D.A. and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2011
1. The counsel for the petitioner seeks time to rejoin to the counter affidavit of the respondent No.1 DDA. 2. The counter affidavit of the respondent No.1 DDA was handed over to the counsel for the petitioner on 5 th August, 2011. The counsel for the petitioner himself admits that he has had two weeks to respond. 3. Further adjournment cannot be granted since the petitioner is enjoying the interim order. 4. The writ petition has been filed to restrain the respondent No.1 DDA from carrying out demolition and / or from taking possession and / or from dispossessing the petitioner from property bearing plot No.41-A forming part of Khasra No.2727/1674 in village Kishangarh, New Delhi. 5. The counsel for the petitioner admits that the petitioner has no right or title in the land aforesaid. His only argument however is that the property aforesaid of the petitioner is part of the unauthorized colony of Kishangarh to which a Provisional Regularization Certificate has been issued. The counsel f...
Ajay Kumar Joshi and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2011
1. Regard being had to the commonality of controversy, this batch of writ petitions was heard together and is disposed of by a singular order. Ajay Kumar Joshi, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.3457/2011, preferred two original applications before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (for short „the tribunal) forming the subject matter of O.A. Nos.2357/2010 and 3604/2010 assailing the action of the State of Uttarakhand in extending the benefit of promotion to the respondent nos. 4 to 6 in the pay scale of the Chief Secretary and further challenging the selection of the respondent - Subhash Kumar for the post of Chief Secretary of the State on the foundation that there has been total violation of the provisions contained in the Rules, Regulations and instructions in the field. The tribunal accepted the contentions raised by the applicant before it and set aside the benefit of promotion extended to the respondent - Subhash Kumar and also quashed the order of ...
Dr. Prem Lata Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2011
1. We have heard Dr. Prem Lata, appellant in person who has assailed the decision dated 3rd May, 2011, dismissing her Writ Petition (Civil) No. 178/2011. The appellant claims that appointment of Mr. Rakesh Kapoor, Mr. C.K. Chaturvedi and Mr. S.N.A. Zaidi, respondents 4, 5 & 6 herein as a Presidents of respective District Forum, should be set aside and quashed and mandamus should be issued for appointment of the appellant as a President of one of the District Forums in Delhi w.e.f. 1st December, 2010 with all consequential benefits. 2. The appellant is a member of District Forum and pursuant to advertisements published in newspapers on 18th March, 2010, inviting applications for the post of 5 Presidents, had applied for appointment as a President of one of District Forums in Delhi. 72 applications including that of the appellant were received and after scrutiny 63 candidates were called for interview. 3. As per Section 10(1)(A) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Consumer Act, for...
Satinder Kapur and ors. Vs. Ifci Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2011
1. M/s.Indian Magnetics Ltd., respondent No.4, is under liquidation. 2. Satinder Kapur, Shyam Sunder Kapur and P.N.Suri were the directors of the company. When all was well and the company was doing good business, credits were availed of by respondent No.4. Amongst others, IFCI Ltd., IDBI Ltd. and ICICI Ltd. had extended credit facilities to the company. Satinder Kapur, Shyam Sunder Kapur and P.N.Suri as directors of the company had stood personal guarantee to repay the credits if the company of which they were the directors of defaulted as per the agreements under which credit facilities were extended. 3. As the sunny days receded and the cold misty days started hanging over respondent No.4, the 3 credit facility providers i.e. IFCI Ltd., IDBI Ltd. and ICICI Ltd. instituted a composite proceeding for recovery of the amount due to them by filing OA No.493/1994 before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal. IFCI Ltd. claimed a decree in sum of `17,43,75,255/-. IDBI Ltd. claimed a decree i...
Sri Doodh Nath Mahadeo Mandir Sabha Vs. Uoi and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2011
1. The petitioner claiming to be an allottee for temple/religious purpose of land in Sector-V of R.K. Puram, New Delhi filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- a. "Issue a writ of mandamus mandating the respondents herein to take urgent steps to remove the encroachers by demolishing the unauthorized structures put up by the encroachers in the temple premises of the petitioner situated in Sector-V, R.K. Puram, New Delhi. b. Issue a writ of mandamus mandating the respondent to take other necessary steps as a follow up of the allotment letter dated 31.12.1976 and letters dated 21.06.2005 and 03.04.2008, having accepted the whole money payable, the balance of `43,393/- having been accepted on 09.04.2008. c. Issue appropriate writs in the nature of directions, directing an enquiry as to the cropping up of several encroachers having nexus with L&DO and MCD officials/Police from 1980 onwards." 2. This Bench on 10th November, 2009 ordered that the writ petition could not be ent...
Bharat Singh and ors. Vs. D.D.A. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2011
1. The three petitioners in W.P.(C) No.19506-08/2005 claim to be members of an undivided joint Hindu family comprising not only of the three petitioners but others also who are not before this Court; they further claim that the said undivided joint Hindu family is entitled to land admeasuring 8 bighas and 6 biswas falling in Khasra No.3741/3221/2752/734 in Village-Basai Darapur, New Delhi; they claim the said land to be their ancestral property; it is however their case that respondent DDA in September, 2003 demolished the structures existing on the said land, claiming the land to be of the DDA. 2. The three petitioners further claim that on their request the SDM, Patel Nagar in October/November, 2003 commenced proceedings for demarcation of the land but the respondents DDA and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (DMRC) during the demarcation proceedings even started digging the land claiming that the land was required under the Rehabilitation Scheme for affected persons at Moti Nagar. 3...
Manav Bharti India International School Vs. Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi a ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-2011
1. The process fee filed by the petitioner for service of the respondent No.2 workman remained under objection. The counsel for the petitioner states that the respondent No.2 workman has already been proceeded ex parte. However a perusal of the order sheet shows that though the respondent No.2 workman was proceeded against ex parte on 23rd October, 2009 but the said order was recalled on the very next date i.e. 5 th March, 2010 and the petitioner was directed to serve the respondent No.2 workman. The petitioner since then has not been able to serve the respondent No.2 workman. 2. The writ petition has been filed impugning the order dated 28 th May, 2008 of the "appropriate government" within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referring the dispute raised by the respondent No.2 workman for adjudication to the Industrial Adjudicator. 3. Though notice of the writ petition was issued but the application for stay of proceedings before the Industrial Adjudicator was dismissed a...
M/S Prabhatam Advertising Pvt. Ltd Vs. M/S Green City Buildtech Pvt. L ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-2011
1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs 24,21,320.05. The plaintiff is an advertising company and was engaged by the defendant to advertise its products and services. The plaintiff-company used to place advertisement in newspaper and various electronic channels on behalf of the defendant. A sum of Rs 24,21,320.05 was due to the plaintiff-company as on 31st March, 2008 towards unpaid amount for the advertisements published/broadcast on behalf of the defendant-company. Since the defendant has failed to pay the aforesaid amount, the plaintiff is seeking its recovery along with interest. 2. The defendant filed written statement contesting the suit. It is alleged in the written statement that the defendant had paid all the dues to the plaintiff for the work done by it for the defendant. It was also alleged that the plaintiff had concealed that 50% of the payment of production job used to be made in advance. 3. The defendant was proceeded ex parte on 29 th March, 2011. The plaintiff has filed a...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Padma Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-2011
1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner/MCD praying inter alia for setting aside the common judgment and order dated 1.8.2003 passed in HTA nos. 152-153/2002, both entitled "Padma Devi v. MCD", wherein the learned ADJ set aside the assessment order dated 20.08.2001 relating to property no. W-85, Greater Kailash-II, New Delhi assessed at a rateable value of `4,27,100/- w.e.f. 22.6.2001. 2. The brief facts of this case are that the respondent/assessee acquired the subject plot of land in the year 1974, on which basement, ground floor, first floor and second floor were got constructed between the years 1980-87. The total covered area of the basement was 3178 sq. ft., out of which 1200 sq. ft. was admittedly under self use for commercial purpose and the remaining area was under self residential use, where household goods were stated to be stored. The rest of the floors of the premises were being used for residential purposes. Since there was a change in use of the basement from ...
Rita Kishore and ors Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-12-2011
1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs.42 lakh as damages and compensation. Late Sh. Giri Raj Kishore, husband of plaintiff No.1 and father of plaintiffs No.2 and 3, was an employee of defendant DDA, working as Assistant Field Investigator and he died in a fatal accident while on duty, in DDA office at Vikas Sadan, New Delhi, when he was crushed by a lift. It is alleged that the defendant had provided defective and ill-maintained lift for its employees, in violation of safety rules, which resulted in the aforesaid fatal accident claiming the life of Sh. Giri Raj Kishore. At the time of his death Sh. Giri Raj Kishore was about 37 years old and had another 21 years to retire. It is alleged that he was drawing a salary of Rs.4000/- per month at that time. The plaintiffs have claimed Rs.37 lakh towards loss of salary benefits, economic loss, retirement benefits, etc. and a sum of Rs.5 lakh has been claimed as damages for installing unsafe lifts which resulted into the fatal accident, causing...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »