Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-03-2012
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. 1. Vide impugned judgment dated May 18, 1999, the appellants (brothers) have been convicted for having murdered deceased “Vijay”and for having attempted to murder “Ashok Kumar”(brother of Vijay) and for the former offence have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and for the latter to undergo RI for 3 years. Whereas appellant Vijender @ Balli has been held to be the principal offender, appellant Balwan has been convicted with the aid of Section 34 IPC. 2. In a nutshell, the case set up by the prosecution against the appellants (as emerging from the testimonies of the police officials and other witnesses associated with the investigation of the present case) was that on 17.07.1996 at about 09.45 P.M. HC Ram Pal, Duty Officer at PS Jahangir Puri, recorded DD entry No.53B Ex.PW-1/A, to the effect that the Police Control Room had informed that a quarrel had taken place in the street where house bearing Municipal No.J-500, Jahangir Pu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-13-2012
A.K. Sikri, (Acting Chief Justice). 1. Army Wives Welfare Association (‘AWWF’ for brevity) is a voluntary and Non-Government Organization (NGO) established with an intention to carry out charity. It started a school for handicapped children of Army Personnel known as “Asha school”. Some funding is provided to this school by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India (appellant herein). In this behalf, the appellants have issued guidelines in the year, 1999 which stated that DD Division of the Ministry has been administering four NGO Schemes, viz., “Scheme to Promote Voluntary Action Persons with Disabilities” (‘scheme’ in short) since 1992-93 and in order to broaden the objective of the Scheme and to make it in consonance with the provisions of The Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1955 [hereinafter referred to as „Disabilities Act’], all ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-24-2012
A.K. SIKRI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE. 1. The respondent workman herein was served with charge-sheet dated 23.09.1998 at the time when he was serving with erstwhile Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking (DESU) as an Inspector. In the charge-sheet, the imputation against him was that he had energized a commercial light connection sanctioned against K.No.614-121778 in favour of one Sh. Girbar Singh at premises of one Mr. Rakesh Kumar on the main road of Babarpur and not at premises No.20-A-3/17, Vishwakarma Road, Babarpur, Shahdara where it was actually to be energized. 2. To put it otherwise, it is not in dispute that the electricity connection had been sanctioned by the officials of the Commercial Department of DESU and the only allegation against the respondent workman was that he had installed the said connection at the wrong address at the instance of one Mr. Rakesh Kumar in whose shop electricity connection was in fact energized and that shop was not at the address for which the electricity...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-23-2012
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. 1. This Intra-Court appeal impugns the order dated 23rd March, 2010 of the learned Single Judge allowing W.P.(C) No.7225/2007 preferred by the respondents and consequently directing the appellants to release a sum of Rs.67,57,072/- to the respondents; the appellants have also been burdened with interest @ Rs.10% per annum for delay in payment and with costs. Notice of this appeal was issued and the operation of the impugned order stayed. The writ record has also been requisitioned. The counsels have been heard. 2. The respondents had filed the writ petition pleading, that they were / are engaged in the business of supplying tents / tin sheds and other furniture on hire; that in the years 1998 to 2000, the Directorate of Education of the appellants had placed an order on the respondents for erection of tin shed structures in some of the government schools in Delhi; similar orders were placed on other tent houses also including one Punjabi Tent House; that during ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-01-2012
ANIL KUMAR, J. 1. The petitioner has sought a direction to the respondents to constitute an Independent Medical Board for his medical examination and has also sought direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to join the Indian Navy-01/2012 batch in case the petitioner is declared fit. 2. The petitioner has contended that he is a young and bright student, and that he is from a very humble background. The petitioner had passed his Matriculation Examination in the year 2008 from the BSEB, Patna by securing first division. The petitioner, thereafter, passed the Intermediate Examination in the year 2010 from BSEB, Patna by scoring 66% in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics. Pursuant to an advertisement dated 18th June, 2011 for enrollment as MR/NMR 01/2012 batch in Indian Navy, the petitioner had applied for the same. Thereafter, the petitioner was issued a call up letter-cum-admit card which was for examination scheduled for 4th October, 2011. The petitioner had passed the writte...
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 : Feb-28-2012
A.K. SIKRI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE 1. The petitioner herein is an M.Sc. which degree she has obtained from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Delhi. The petitioner claims that she has been remained involved in the work related to patent, drafting, filing and prosecuting application for grant of patent registration by the Patent Office under the Patents Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and has vast experience. However, she has not been able to get herself registered as Patent Agent under the Act because her repeated attempts to pass qualifying examination for Patent Agents have remained unsuccessful. This qualifying exam is in two parts, namely, written test and viva voce examination. Though she has exhibited excellent performance in so far as written test is concerned, as she has not been able to secure minimum 50% marks in the viva voce examination, which is the requirement of Rule 110 of the Patents Rules, she is treated as unqualified. It is for this...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-02-2012
MANMOHAN SINGH, J. 1. The Plaintiff has filed the present suit alleging infringement of copyright and passing off in respect of the Defendant’s product, “Shilajit Gold”. The Plaintiff has also filed an application seeking interim injunction restraining the Defendant from using Defendant’s product pending trial in the matter. Both parties have made their respective submissions. By this order, I propose to decide the pending interim application being IA No. 6255/2012 (Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC). CASE OF THE PLAINTIFF 2. The present suit pertains to trade mark comprising trade dress and get-up of DABUR SHILAJIT GOLD packaging which has been advertised and sold extensively since 2006. 3. Packagings used by the plaintiff in the year 2006 and since August, 2010 are scanned and reproduced hereunder: “Picture” It appears that substantially both packaging as shown are almost similar. 4. As per the case of the plaintiff, the said pac...
Tag this Judgment!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 : Aug-08-2012
Reported in : 2012(4)LLN666
1. By way of the present petition the Petitioner impugnes the award dated 1st May, 2002 whereby the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court has directed reinstatement of Respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 with 40% back wages and continuity of service. 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that the primary issue raised by the Petitioner that it was not an industry was virtually glossed over by the learned Trial Court and the Petitioner was held to be an industry though the Petitioner is doing charitable work and is wholly dependent on the grants and aids received from Government of India. Reliance is placed on Banglore Water Supply and Sewerage Board Vs. A. Rajappa and Ors. (1978) 2 SCC 213. The Petitioner/society is running mostly by voluntary workers who do not charge any money, though a honorarium of Rs. 1200/- per month is paid for their livelihood. The society is working for the upliftment of tribals and one of the major functions of the society is running crches for the children ...
Tag this Judgment!