Delhi Court September 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.
Dinesh Kumar Goyal Vs. Ajai Kumar Goel and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-2011
1. The appellant herein Dinesh Kumar Goyal and Ajai Kumar Goyal, Praveen Kumar Goel and Arun Kumar Goyal, respondents herein are brothers being children of late Dr. Shanti Swaroop Goyal and Lila Goyal. 2. Leasehold property no. A-68, Swasthya Vihar, Vikas Marg, New Delhi was originally allotted in the joint names of late Dr. Shanti Swaroop Goyal and Pradeep Kumar Goyal. 3. Dr. Shanti Swaroop Goyal died inestate in July 2000 and was survived by Lila Goyal, the appellant and the three respondents. His daughter Usha Garg inherited interest in the property. However, she, along with Parveen Kumar Goyal, executed a Relinquishment Deed dated 2nd August 2000, which is registered with the Sub- Registrar, in respect of 50% share of Dr. Shanti Swaroop Goyal in favour of their mother Lila Goyal, the appellant and the 2 remaining respondents, Ajai Kumar Goyal and Arun Kumar Goyal. The appellant does not dispute the said Relinquishment Deed and is a beneficiary thereunder. 4. The appellant, the thre...
Madhu Mehra and anr. Vs. Kamal Kishore and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-2011
1. By this judgment it is proposed to decide two appeals , being FAO No. 523/2001 entitled "Madhu Mehra and Ors. Versus Kamal Kishore Jai Chand and Ors." and FAO No. 269/2002 entitled "Kamal Kishore Jai Chand versus Madhu Mehra and Ors.", as common questions of law and fact are involved. The first of these two appeals has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal by its judgment dated 08.08.2001, while the second appeal has been filed by the owner of the offending vehicle praying for the setting aside of the aforesaid judgment on the ground that he had sold the offending vehicle to one Jeet Singh prior to the date of the accident and accordingly he is not liable to pay the award amount to the claimants. 2. The facts may be briefly recapitulated as follows. 3. On 01.12.1983, one Kamal Mehra, aged about 37 years, died in a motor vehicular accident caused by the driver of Bus No.DEP-2767 under the operation of the Delhi Tr...
Indian Social Action Forum(insaf) Vs. the Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-2011
1. The petitioner, Indian Social Action Forum (INSAF), has preferred this writ petition for declaring Sections 5(1) & 5(4) of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 (for brevity, „the Act) and Rules 3(i), 3(v) & 3(vi) of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Rules, 2011 (for short, „the 2011 Rules) as ultra vires the Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(c) and 21 of the Constitution of India. 2. At the very outset, we may note that the petitioner has stated about its status and the social activity it carries out and how the Act came into force. They need not be adverted to, for we are only concerned with the constitutional validity of the aforesaid provisions of the Act. 3. To appreciate the controversy, it is appropriate to refer to Section 3 of the Act, which reads as follows: "3. Prohibition to accept foreign contribution. - (1) No foreign contribution shall be accepted by any - (a) candidate for election; (b) correspondent, columnist, cartoonist, editor, owner,...
Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors. Vs. Ex. Constable Ashok Kumar and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-2011
1. The petitioners, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors., have challenged the order dated 5th February, 2009 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in OA No.1516/2008 titled as „Ex. Constable (Executive) Ashok Kumar & Anr. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors., allowing the original application of the respondent and setting aside the order of dismissal dated 9th August, 2006 dismissing the respondents from the service, after dispensing with the enquiry, by invoking Article 311 (2)(b) of the Constitution of India and also setting aside the order of the Appellate Authority dated 5th June, 2008 upholding the punishment in appeal and dismissing the appeal of the respondent. The Tribunal also directed that the respondents would be deemed as undergoing suspension from 9th August, 2006 to 9th April, 2009. The petitioners were held to be not precluded from proceeding further against the respondent in accordance with law. 2. The brief facts to comprehend t...
Pawan Goyal and ors. Vs. Sebi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-2011
1. A complaint was filed on behalf of SEBI through its General Manager Mr.Jyoti Jindgar, and taking cognizance of the same the accused i.e. the company and persons stated to be its directors and in day-to-day control of the affairs of the company were summoned to face trial by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate. It is alleged in the complaint that Section 11 of the SEBI Act casts a duty on SEBI to protect the interest of investors in securities. It was alleged that SEBI noted that many companies were issuing instruments such as agro bonds, plantation bonds etc. which were to be treated as „Collective Investment Schemes and thus SEBI framed and notified the „Securities and Exchange Board of India (Collective Investment Schemes) Regulations 1999 and as per Regulation 68 thereof persons operating Collective Investment Schemes had to register the scheme before the Board and as per Regulation 73 in the failure to do so, the scheme would be wound up with information to the inves...
Santosh Kumar Gupta Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-2011
1. Since litigating parties are the same i.e. Santosh Kumar Gupta, the petitioner and Religare Securities Ltd., the respondent; both captioned petitions are being disposed of by a common order. 2. The subject matter of Crl.M.C.No.2271/2010 is a cheque bearing No.258810 in sum of `5,00,000/- drawn on Etah Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. which when presented for encashment was returned by the said bank with the remark „Drawers signature different and „Funds insufficient. The subject matter of Crl.M.C.No.862/2010 is a cheque bearing No.258815 in sum of `5,00,000/- drawn on Etah Urban Co- operative Bank Ltd. which when presented for encashment was returned by the said bank with the remark „Drawers signature different and „Funds insufficient. 3. Being the holder of the two cheques, Religare Securities Ltd. filed two complaints against the petitioner alleging that the cheques were issued by the petitioner in discharge of debts accrued to the company. It was pleaded that ...
Sh.Gyan Prakash Vishnoi Vs. the Secretary
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-2011
1. The petitioner claims to have become a member of the R-1/Society on 31.12.1996 and deposited amounts from time to time with R-1/Society totaling to Rs.2,50,000/- up to the year 2000. The R-1/Society was allotted a plot no.25, Sector 12, Dwarka (Pappankala) admeasuring 4,500 square yards and this information was furnished to the members including the petitioner vide letter dated 16.04.2000 recording that Rs.1,50,000/- had been paid by the petitioner and thus the balance amount was Rs. 1,00,000/-, which is stated to have been paid on 29.05.2000. The petitioner claims that he shifted to another country but informed the Managing Committee of R-1/Society about his fresh contact address which was his permanent address being E-100, Saket, New Delhi ('the Saket address' for short) as was given in the original application form of membership of R-1/Society ('the application form' for short). The writ petition does not thereafter referred to any written communication by the petitioner or to hi...
Dr. K.S. Jawatkar and anr. Vs. Jawaharlal Nehru University and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-2011
1. These are two writ petitions by Dr. K.S. Jawatkar who retired as Associate Professor in the School of International Studies („SIS) of Jawaharlal Nehru University („JNU). In W.P. (C) 2044 of 1992, the prayer is that the JNU should release to the Petitioner his revised salary and other allowances including arrears with interest accrued thereon in the post of Assistant Professor with effect from 1st January 1986, to promote the Petitioner with effect from 1st January 1983, give the benefits of the „Merit Promotion Scheme („MPS) and quash the list of faculty members of the JNU as on 1st October 1989 published in a document „Jawaharlal Nehru University: 20th Anniversary. 2. The prayer in the second W.P. (C) 911 of 2007 is for a direction to the JNU to grant the Petitioner promotion as Professor with effect from 1st January 1992, alternatively as the Professor Appadorai Chair in International Relations with effect from 1995. The Petitioner further seeks a dec...
Bhupen Electronics Ltd. Vs. Appellate Authority for Industrial and Fin ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-2011
1. The appellant being aggrieved by an order dated 11.06.2009 passed by BIFR in reference case No.32/2007 preferred appeal no.104/2010 before the AAIFR. This appeal was not accompanied by any application for condonation of delay as according to the appellant, the appeal had been filed within time. 2. The appeal had been dismissed as time barred, not having been filed within a period of 45 days, and not being accompanied by any application for condonation of delay by the impugned order dated 18.11.2010 of the AAIFR. This order has been passed at the initial stage itself in the absence of any representation of the respondents. 3. It is the say of the appellant that the order dated 11.06.2009 of the BIFR was never received by the appellant company and the appellant company derived knowledge from one of the secured creditors, and therefore immediately thereafter, they applied for certified copy on 22.02.2010 which was received on 26.02.2010. The appeal was filed on 08.04.2010. Thus, it is ...
Ram Devi and anr. Vs. Raj Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-16-2011
1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellants for enhancement of the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal by its judgment and award dated 1.11.1999 passed in Suit No-11of 1989, whereby and whereunder the appellants were held entitled to an award of ` 60,000/ with the interest thereon at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization. 2. The brief facts which led to the filing of the appeal are that on 31.10.1988 at about 11 a.m., one Subhash Chand (hereinafter referred as "the deceased") was going from his house to Kirti Nagar.While he was crossing the road in front of Kishan Ganj dispensary a scooter bearing no - DBH 5633, coming from the Sarai Rohilla side at a high speed, without blowing any horn, hit the deceased with full force. As a result of the forceful impact, the deceased sustained grievous injuries to which he succumbed on 11.11.1988. A claim petition was filed by the widow and son of the decea...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »