Delhi Court February 2012 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds - plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Usha and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-24-2012
G. P. MITTAL, J. 1. This Appeal arises out of a claim Petition MACT Suit No.121/2009 preferred under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act which was allowed by a judgment dated 11.01.2010. A compensation of Rs.8,10,400/- along with interest @ 7.5% was awarded for the death of one Anil Kumar Mishra who was aged 38 years at the time of the accident. 2. The contentions raised on behalf of the Appellant Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. are as under: i) Since the Petition was filed under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, the compensation should have been awarded in accordance with Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988; no future prospects could have been granted on the income of the deceased. The compensation towards non-pecuniary heads should have been awarded only in accordance with the Second Schedule. Deduction towards personal and living expenses was also required to be 1/3rd as against 1/5th made by the Claims Tribunal; ii) The driver of the offending vehicle did not po...
icici Lombard General Insurance Co Ltd and Another Vs. Jaipal Singh an ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-24-2012
JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J. (ORAL) 1. These are two Appeals where a common question of law is involved. In MAC APP.584/2011 the Appellant ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited seeks reduction of compensation of Rs. 6,24,400/- awarded for the death of Tarun Kumar, who was a student of B.Sc. final year. The accident in this case took place on 03.09.2009.2. In MAC APP.524/2011 a compensation of Rs. 6,01,400/- was awarded for the death of Sachin, who was aged about 20 years and who was a student of B. Com, Second Year in Delhi University.3. Both were bachelors.4. In the case of Tarun’s death, it was claimed that the deceased was imparting tuitions and was earning Rs. 7,000/- per month. In the absence of any documentary evidence minimum wages of a matriculate were taken, after making addition of 50% towards the inflation, 50% was deducted towards the personal and living expenses, the multiplier of ‘14’ as per the age of the deceased’s mother was applied and t...
B.R. Surendranath Singh Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-24-2012
A.K. SIKRI, ACJ (ORAL) 1. The admitted facts are, that a mining lease of 150 acres in Tumkur District, Karnataka was granted on 17.05.1976 for a period of ten years to one Smt. Kamla Bai predecessor of the appellant; the term of the said mining lease expired on 17.05.1986; application for renewal of the said mining lease was filed only on 28th September, 1993 i.e. after nearly seven years of the expiry of the term of the lease. The reason given for the delay in applying for renewal was that said Smt. Kamla Bai had suffered paralytic stroke and therefore had become incapacitated since 6/7 years prior to the expiry of the mining lease and could file the application for renewal only on 28th September, 1993. The said application was rejected by the State Government vide order dated 30.01.2010 holding that the application for renewal filed on 28.09.1993 was invalid and there was no provision under the Rules for condonation of delay if application for renewal was made after expiry of the lea...
Sheesh Pal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-24-2012
VEENA BIRBAL, J1. This appeal is filed against impugned judgment dated 12.07.2010 in Sessions Case No. 41/2010 passed by the learned Addl Sessions Judge-III, North Delhi arising out of FIR No. 286/2002 P.S. Sabzi Mandi by which appellant has been convicted under Section 363/302/201 IPC. The appeal is also directed against the order of sentence dated 12.07.2010 by which he has been sentenced to undergo RI for 5 years and a fine of ` 5,000/-, in default SI for 3 months for the offence under Section 363 of IPC. He is further sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of ` 50,000/-, in default SI for one year for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. The appellant is further sentenced to undergo RI for 4 years and a fine of ` 5,000/-, in default SI for 3 months for the offence under Section 201 of IPC.2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 25.10.2002, the complainant Rajbir PW-10, made a statement Ex. PW10/A in P.S. Sabzi Mandi alleging therein that he is a rag picker. O...
M.C.D. Vs. Sureshi Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-24-2012
G.P. MITTAL, J. 1. The Appellant Municipal Corporation of Delhi impugns the judgment dated 10.01.2007 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (the Claims Tribunal) whereby a compensation of Rs.1,70,296/- was awarded for the death of Vinod Kumar Joshi who was aged about 23 years and a bachelor at the time of the accident, which occurred on 31.10.2001. No Cross Appeal/Cross Objections have been filed by the First Respondent. 2. The following contentions are raised on behalf of the Appellant:- (i) The Claims Tribunal failed to record any finding on negligence, yet decided the issue of negligence against the Appellant; and (ii) There was no proof of the deceased’s income; his income was taken as per minimum wages of an unskilled worker but were increased by 50% towards the future prospects without any basis. 3. On the other hand, it is submitted on behalf of First Respondent that the negligence was duly proved from PW-2’s testimony. The compensation awarded was very low....
Nandhivaram Radha Nagar, Residential Welfare Association Rep. by Its P ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Feb-24-2012
This matter came up last time for hearig on 04.01.2012. It was informed to the Tribunal that in so far as Radha Nagar residential area is concerned there is no dumping of solid waste, whereas in case of the water body still the garbage is being dumped and this is polluting the water body and the water-area is shrinking. On 10.01.2012 we directed the Nandhivaram Grama Panchayat as well the District Environmental Engineer, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB), Kanchipuram District, Marai Malai Nagar, to monitor the situation and also to take out video graphic evidence of the entire area including the water body. In the presence of the District Environmental Engineer, TNPCB, Kanchipuram District, Marai Malai Nagar, the Executive Officer of Nandhivaram Panchayat videographed the entire area and submitted the Compact Disc (CD) to the Tribunal, to show that there is no pollution caused by the dumping of the waste material in the Radha Nagar Colony or the water body. There is no dispute...
N. Chellamuthu Vs. the District Collector and Others
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Feb-24-2012
This application is filed seeking relief for protection of environment against Respondent-5, who is said to be causing noise and dust pollution round the clock by running three powerlooms at Ward No. 13, Jhansi Nagar, Veerapan Chatram, Erode District, Tamil Nadu. The complaint of the applicant in a nut shell is that he is a resident of Jhansi Nagar, Veerapan Chatram, Erode District, Tamil Nadu and the Respondent-5 has three Powerlooms operating in Survey No. 164/2, 192/2, 199/2 of Jhansi Nagar, Veerappan Chatram, Erode District, which are making loud noise round the clock in the locality. The school going children are not able to do their home work and the elderly people are not able to sleep due to heavy noise. Some of them are in fact affected by so many health problems like asthma, sinusitis, etc., due to emission of cotton dust. Though he made a representation on 24.01.2011 to Respondent-2, ventilating the grievances of residents and to remove all the powerlooms from the residentia...
Angrej Singh Vs. Chief of Army Staff
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Feb-24-2012
1. The applicant had filed this WP(C) no. 3227/99 in the Honble High Court, Delhi. The case was subsequently transferred to this Tribunal on 07.01.2010 and registered as T.A. No. 322/10. 2. The applicant vide his petition has prayed for setting aside the discharge order dated 31.01.1997, to reinstate the applicant and allow with consequential benefits. 3. The brief facts of the case are that applicant was enrolled in the Army on 15.04.1996 as recruit. He was discharged after 10 months and 17 days of training on 31.01.1997(Annexure A-1). After discharge he submitted an application to know the cause of discharge to the Commandant, Para Regimental Training Centre on 04.07.1997. He also sent a reminder through a legal notice on 02.06.1998. Respondents replied to his application and the legal notice on 10.09.1998 (Annexure A-8) in which it was said that the individual was granted discharge based on his own request. On 08.02.1999 he again made a representation to the respondents in which he ...
Prem Chand Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, Through Its Chairman
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2012
ORAL: M.L. Chauhan, Member (J): 1. Applicant has filed this OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: “(a) direct the sole respondent to re-fix the pay scale of the applicant by counting the benefit of his continuity of service whereby regularizing the period of his service from removal dt. 20.08.1993 till the date of his reinstatement order dt. 27.02.2007 for all purposes including increment, promotions, ACPs, pension, gratuity and for all other service benefit and fixing the salary of the applicant at par his similar situated employee; (b) allow the cost of the petition in the interest of justice as the applicant has been compelled by the respondent to approach this Hon’ble Tribunal; (c) pass such other and further orders, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 2. As can be seen from the relief clause the grievance of the applicant is regarding regularization of his services from removal dated 20...
Dr. Alok Singh and Others Vs. Commissioner and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-23-2012
V.K. Bali, Chairman: 1. In hand for disposal is Original Application No.3171/2010 filed by Dr. Alok Kumar Singh and three others, including Dr. Ashish Priyadarshi (3rd applicant), as also two misc. applications bearing MA Nos.2615/2011 and 2616/2011 in Transferred Application (TA) No.913/2009 seeking setting aside of order dated 12.10.2009 allowing the TA aforesaid, styling it as an ex parte order; and seeking condonation of delay in filing the said application. The two misc. applications referred to above have been filed only by Dr. Ashish Priyadarshi, the 3rd applicant arrayed in OA No.3171/2010, even though it is not in dispute that all the applicants were party respondents in TA No.913/2009. 2. This Tribunal disposed of TA No.913/2009 filed by Ranbir Singh, arrayed as 3rd respondent in the present OA, vide order dated 12.10.2009. Ranbir Singh had initially filed a writ petition in the High Court of Delhi, which came to be transferred to this Tribunal and was numbered as TA No.913/2...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »