Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-02-2012
G. P. Mittal, J. 1. These two Appeals (MAC APP. No.346/2010 and MAC APP. No.279/2011) arise out of a judgment dated 22.03.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby a compensation of Rs.3,03,883/- along with interest @ 8% per annum was awarded in favour of R.K. Jain who suffered injuries in a motor accident which occurred on 21.07.1999. 2. For the sake of convenience, the Appellant National Insurance Co. Ltd. (Appellant in MAC APP. No.346/2010) shall be referred to as the Insurance Company, whereas the Cross-Objectionist (MAC APP. No.279/2011) shall be referred to as the Claimant. 3. On 21.07.1999, the Claimant was driving down his car No.DL-3CG-4426 from Bharatpur to Delhi. A truck No.RJ-25G-0104 while being driven in a rash and negligent manner by the Second Respondent hit the Claimant’s car from behind; as a result of the forceful impact windscreen of the Claimant’s car broke into pieces. Some of the screen pallets pierced on to the f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-23-2012
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. 1. These Intra-Court appeals impugn the common judgment dated 25th July, 2011 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 4342/2007, W.P.(C) No. 4344/2007, W.P.(C) No. 13393/2009 and W.P.(C) No. 13628/2009 preferred by the respondents herein. Of the said four writ petitions, two i.e. W.P.(C) No. 4342/2007 and W.P.(C) No. 4344/2007 were filed impugning the common judgment dated 22nd May, 2007 of the learned District Judge [exercising powers under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971] and dismissing the appeals preferred by the respondents against the order dated 18th April, 2006 of the Estate Officer of eviction of the respondents from Flat No.14/12190 and Flat No.7/10181 on the first floor of Tropical Building, H- Block, Connaught Circus, New Delhi. The other two writ petitions i.e. W.P.(C) No. 13393/2009 and W.P.(C) No.13628/2009 were preferred assailing the common judgment dated 29th October, 2009 of the learned Distri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-30-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 4th January, 2012 Pronounced on: 30th January, 2012 + MAC.APP. 590/2011 ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO LTD. .... Appellant Through: Ms. Suman Bagga, Adv. versus MASTER MANMEET SINGH and ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Gurmit Singh Hans, Adv. for R-1 to.4. + MAC.APP. 563/2010 Reserved on: 16th January, 2012 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD..... Appellant Through: Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa, Adv. versus KESHAV PARSHAD and ORS ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Manjeet Chawla, Adv. + MAC.APP. 753/2011 Reserved on: 16th January, 2012 DULI CHAND and ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Sanjeev Srivastava, Adv. versus INDER PAL and ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate for R-3. MAC APP 590/2011 Etc. Page 1 of 32 + MAC.APP. 772/2011 Reserved on: 16th January, 2012 ARUN SHARMA and ORS ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv. with Ms. Suman N. Rawat, Advocate versus RAM KUMAR TYAGI and ORS ..... Respondent Through: Mr. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-11-2012
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. 1. The intra court appeal subject matter of LPA 9/2012 impugns the order dated 23rd December, 2011 of the learned Single Judge dismissing WP(C) No. 8987/2011 preferred by the appellant. The said writ petition was filed challenging the order dated 12th December, 2011 of the District Judge exercising the powers as an Appellate Authority under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 (PP Act) dismissing the appeal preferred by the appellant against the order dated 2nd September, 2011 of the Estate Officer of the respondent LIC of eviction of the appellant from the premises admeasuring 3476 sq ft. on the ground floor of Jeevan Tara Building, 5 Parliament Street, New Delhi of the respondent LIC and of assessing damages for use and occupation @ Rs. 200/- per sq ft. per month for the period from 16th August, 2009 since when the appellant was found to be in unauthorized use and occupation of the said premises. The order of the learn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-14-2012
..... would be the consequences of such termination, is a different matter altogether, but the contract cannot be specifically enforced. 51. to substantiate his submission, he placed reliance on life insurance corporation of india v. escorts ltd., (1986) 1 scc 264. in this case the honble supreme court held that, if the action of the state is related to contractual ..... of a continuous duty which the court will not be able to supervise. thus, as per the submission of the respondent, particularly clause (b) and (d) of section 14(1) are applicable in the present case. 43. the learned asg next contends that the mou is determinable as it provides for termination in clause 5.1, which has been reproduced above, and ..... authorities in the matter specified in article 1.2 above, to its full satisfaction, incorporate a special purpose vehicle under the provisions of the companies act, 1956, as its wholly owned subsidiary, which will act as the joint venture company inter se between ntc and the strategic partner (hereinafter referred to as jvc). the name of the jvc will be the existing ..... insurance co. ltd. vs. manubhai dharamsinhbhai gajera and ors., (2008) 10 scc 404, and; karnataka state forest industries corporation vs. indian rocks, (2009) 1 scc 150. 57. it is further contended that state instrumentalities cannot rely upon section 14 of the specific relief act to justify arbitrary and unfair termination of contracts. article 14 of the constitution is a complete defense to section .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-27-2012
S.RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) 1. The Appellant challenges a judgment and order of a learned Single Judge of this Court, decreeing OS No. 1394/79. The appellant was arrayed as defendant in the respondents’ suit which sought decree of specific performance of the agreement to sell (hereafter “the agreement”) dated 6.6.1977 (executed by the appellant in their favour) and consequential decree for possession (of ground floor part) and also for damages. 2. The plaintiffs had contended that the Defendant No. 1 (hereafter “the appellant”) executed the agreement to sell the property No. 227 in Block E, Greater Kailash, New Delhi measuring 208 sq. yards in their favor for a consideration of Rs. 2,00,000/-. They had paid Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. 21,000/- as earnest money and Rs.79,000/- as advance part payment) to him on 9.6.1977 at the time of execution and presentation for registration of the agreement before the Sub-Registrar. The appellant had delivered vacant physical ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-10-2012
ORDER 1. Apart from petitioners being in arrears of license fee, bonafide necessity/space crunch in President’s Estate, New Delhi, is the reason disclosed by the contesting respondent in the eviction petition but in the Notice under Section 4 of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 issued by the Estate Officer, the reason to seek petitioners’ eviction from the shops/residential premises allotted under License Agreements, is that the petitioners are in arrears of license fee and upon expiry of notice period, their possession upon Shop Nos.2 to 7, and Quarter Nos.75 to 80, in Block 13; Shop-cum-Quarter No.96 to 98, G-Point; and Shop/Garage No.12/4 and Quarter No.12/6, in President’s Estate Market, New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the subject premises), is unauthorized. 2. Eviction proceedings were initiated against the petitioners in the year 2003, in pursuance to Notice under Section 4 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Oc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-10-2012
ORDER 1. Alleging discrimination and bias against the Estate Officer, order of 20th July, 2010 evicting the petitioner from 1382.26 sq.ft. space on 7th floor of Bank of Baroda building at 16, Parliament Street, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the subject premises) was unsuccessfully challenged by the petitioner by preferring a statutory appeal under Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, which stands dismissed vide impugned order of 14th December, 2011. 2. Undisputed facts as noted in the impugned order are that petitioner's lease on the subject premises was last extended with effect from 1st June, 1986 for a period of five years and vide respondent's Communication of 22nd January, 1990, petitioner was called upon to clear the arrears of lease money, due since July, 1988. Having failed to clear the arrears of `21,68,399.52 p., 'notice to quit' of 23rd May, 2006 was served by the respondent - bank upon the petitioner, who had responded to it, by expressin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-17-2012
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Judgment:17. 12.2012 CO.PET. 167/1999 and Co. Appl. 730/2002, 167/2003, 1861/2012 IN THE MATTER OF TONY ELECTRONICS LTD. .... Petitioner Through Mr. Neeraj Yadav, Mr.Rishabh Maheshwari and Mr.Saurabh Seth, Adv. for the applicant with the applicant-Mr.Gopal Krishan. Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Adv. for the Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(Oral) 1 By way of this application the applicant Gopal Kishan seeks a recall of the order dated 20.09.1999; i.e. setting aside of the scheme which had been sanctioned by this Court on 20.09.1999. This application has been filed on 22.07.2002. 2 Submission in the application being to the effect that this merger had been effected malafide behind the back of the applicant; he was a shareholder of M/s Tony Electronics Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the company) which pursuant to the order dated 20.09.1999 has merged with Super Cassettes Industries Ltd.; no information...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-05-2012
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h November, 2012 % + LPA No.731/2012 THE GONDALS PRESS Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Ajay Kapur, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Amitabh Narayan, Advs. Versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Rajat Sharma, Adv. for R-4. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.This intra-court appeal impugns the order dated 31.10.2012 of the learned Single Judge of dismissal of W.P.(C) No.3721/2012 preferred by the appellant. The said writ petition was filed impugning the order dated 31.05.2012 of the District Judge exercising powers as an Appellate Authority under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 (PP Act) dismissing the appeal preferred by the appellant against the order dated 27.03.2012 of the Estate Officer of the respondent Bank of eviction of the appellant from an area comprising of 2223 sq. ft. on the Ground and Mezzanine Floor of property...
Tag this Judgment!