Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
Decided on : Mar-06-2013
V.K. Gupta, Member(Judicial): 1. This appeal by the appellant/OP of complaint case No.846/2006 is directed against the order dated 21.01.2009 passed by District Forum(New Delhi), directing the appellant to refund Rs.3300/- as fee, Rs.30,000/- as compensation and Rs.5000/- as litigation charges. 2. In nut-shell the brief facts are that on 08.06.2006 a baby was born and the doctors directed the complainant for specific tests to ascertain the genitalai of the baby. The doctor further suggested following case. (i) Sodium, serum (ii) Potassium, serum (iii) Buccal simear/Barr Bodie (iv) Chromosome (Karyctype) 3. The baby was borne at Ram Chand Memorial Nursing Home, which advised that the tests to be conducted by the appellant/OP. Consequently on 09.06.2006 the baby was taken to the laboratory of the appellant for aforesaid tests which charged Rs.3300/-. Respondent/complainant was asking for the report and every time it was directed that the report will be given on 29.06.2006. On this date t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on : Mar-06-2013
G. George Paracken: 1. All these five Original Applications are almost identical and, therefore, they are disposed of by this common order. Facts in them which are necessary for their adjudication are detailed hereunder:- OA 4219/2011 The applicant is aggrieved by the impugned Annexure A-1 show cause notice dated 14.3.2011 and the impugned Annexure A-2 order dated 11.5.2011 passed by the respondents. By the aforesaid show cause notice, he was called upon to explain as to why his candidature for the post of Constable (Executive) in Delhi Police should not be cancelled. The reasons given for the same are as follows:- Scrutiny of your Application Form and Attestation Form filled up by you revealed that you had disclosed in the relevant columns of both the forms about the facts of your involvement in criminal case FIR No.39/2007, dated 15.02.2007 U/s 143/323/341 IPC, PS Laxmangarh, Distt. Alwar (Rajasthan) in which you had been acquitted by the Court vide order dated 04.12.2009 as both the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-28-2013
$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI\ + CS(OS) 1159/2007, I.A. No.7138/2007 (u/O 3.R-1 & 2 CPC), I.A. No.18648/2011 (of proposed co-plaintiff) SHRI NAVAL KISHORE & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through: Plaintiff No.1 in person. Mr. S.K. Duggal, Adv. for P-2 with P-2 in person. Versus SHRI JUGAL KISHORE & ANR. ..... Defendants Through: D-1 in person. Mr. Prasoon Kumar, Adv. for D-2(iv) & (v) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW ORDER % 28.02.2013 I.A. No.21439/2012 (of D-1 u/O 7 R-11 CPC) 1. This order is in continuation of yesterdays order dated 27 th February, 2013.2. Mr. S.K. Duggal, Advocate who states that he is for the plaintiff No.2 only, appears and contends that the amended plaint to which reference was made in yesterdays order was the proposed amended plaint and is not even signed by the plaintiff No.2 and is also not accompanied with the affidavit of the plaintiff No.2. He seeks adjournment to file the amended plaint.3. The amendment was allowed vide order dated 2n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-26-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:12. h February, 2013 Pronounced on:26. h February, 2013 + MAC.APP. 180/2010 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Through: ..... Appellant Ms.Manjusha Wadhwa, Advocate versus ANITA & ORS ..... Respondents Through: + Mr.O.P.Mannie, Advocate MAC.APP. 181/2010 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Through: ..... Appellant Ms.Manjusha Wadhwa, Advocate versus BABITA & ORS ..... Respondent Through: + Mr.O.P.Mannie, Advocate MAC.APP. 193/2010 BABITA & ORS ..... Appellant Through: Mr.O.P.Mannie, Advocate versus SURENDER & ANR Through: ..... Respondent Ms.Manjusha Wadhwa, Advocate for the Respondent No.3 Insurance Company. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. These three Appeals arise out of a judgment dated 05.12.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) whereby two Claim Petitions, that is, MAC Suit No.176/2005 titled Babita & Ors. v. Surender & Ors., and MAC Suit No.183/2005 titled Anita v. Sure...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-25-2013
$-6 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP(C) No.3439/2010 Date of decision :25. h February, 2013 % NARVIR SINGH Through : ..... PETITIONER Col.(Retd.) S.R. Kalkal, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS ..... Respondents Through : Ms. Barkha Babbar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA GITA MITTAL, J.(Oral) CM No.18869/2012 By way of this application, the legal representatives of Cdr. Narvir Singh (Retd.) seek to be impleaded as petitioners as he has unfortunately expired on 16th September, 2012. For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed. WP(C) No.3439/2010 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner assails the order dated 22nd March, 2010 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal in O.A. no.211/2009 rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for grant of pro-rata pension to him from the date of his discharge from the Indian Army and a direction to the respondents to release service pension under Regulation 23 of the Pe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl. Appeal No. 1139/2012 Reserved on:17. h January, 2013 Date of Decision:18th February, 2013 % RAJIV @ DIWANJI Through ....Appellant Mr. Mukesh Kalia with Mr. Vikram Singh Saini and Mr. Mohit Popli, Advocates. Versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP. Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL SANJIV KHANNA, J.Rajiv @ Diwanji, in this appeal, challenges his conviction under Section 302 and 364 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short). The impugned judgment dated 25th August, 2012, holds that the appellant had committed murder of Dalip Kumar Sajwani on 13th December, 2003, after abducting him. By order of sentence dated 27th August, 2012, for the offence under Section 302 IPC, the appellant has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of which he has to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days. For the offence under Section 364 IPC, the appella...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-13-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:13. 02.2013 CEAC 16 2012 WIPRO LIMITED ..... Petitioner Versus UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Devnath, Mr Aditya Bhattacharya, Mr Abhishek Anand & Mr Bhuvnesh Satijha, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr Satish Kr. Senior Standing Counsel for R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR JUDGMENT R.V. EASWAR, J This is an appeal by Wipro Ltd., which was formerly known as Wipro BPO Solutions. It was at the material time engaged in the rendering of IT-enabled services such as technical support services, backoffice services, customer-care services etc. to its various clients all of whom were situated outside India, i.e., in UK, USA and Australia.2. The appeal arises out of the order passed by the Central Excise & Service CEAC 16 2012 Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) in order ST/593/2011(PB) on 05.10.2011, in Appeal No. ST/66/2008. On 12....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on : Feb-13-2013
V. Ajay Kumar, Member (J): 1. The applicant applied for the Combined Graduate Level Examination in the year 2011 in pursuance of the Notification dated 19.03.2011 issued by the Staff Selection Commission. He applied under Un-reserved category, and given his first preference to the post of Inspector (Central Excise) apart from other preferences to other posts. He was allotted with Roll No.2201021148, and as per the said Notification, Examination is to be conducted on 19.06.2011 and 26.06.2011. 2. As per the Scheme of the Notification, candidates have to make a single application form for various posts. The examination will comprise of two Tiers - Written Objective Type examination followed by Computer Proficiency Test/Interview/Skill Test, wherever applicable. As per the Scheme of the examination, as notified, posts have been placed in two groups, interalia, based on their Grade Pay. Preference of posts, Group- wise is to be indicated in the application. Further detailed option for post...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: February 12, 2013 + OMP No.100/2013 RAJIV KAPOOR Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Rajiv Nayar, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Arunabh Chowdhury, Mr.Ashish Jha, Mr.Gainilung Panmei & Mr.Vaibhav Tomar, Advs. versus M/S NOVELL CONSTRUCTIONS ..... Respondent Through Mr.Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Mrinal Bharti, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner is the owner of the property bearing not A-292, New Friends Colony, New Delhi-110065. He had handed over the said property to the respondent, i.e. M/s Novell Constructions under the Memorandum of Understanding dated 4th April, 2011 followed by a Collaboration Agreement dated 20th April, 2011 to demolish the existing structure on the said plot of land and develop, construct and/or built a building consisting of basement, stilt parking, ground floor, first floor, second floor and third floor with terrace at the cost and expense of the responden...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-12-2013
..... appellant has stated: q30. do you want to say anything else? a. police took me and other workers to ps. owner bindra got released other workers and since i was nepali, he did not get me released. on that day since i was tried, i went to the basement at about 7-8 pm and went to sleep. in the morning .....
Tag this Judgment!