Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-24-2005
Reported in : 2005(81)DRJ473
..... the matter. firstly on 13.3.1970 and for a second time on 31.7.1971, while intimating conditional sanction of the plans submitted, the committee had required amendments to the plans. representative of the petitioners had visited the office of the chief architect and some issues were sorted out. probably on the plans some changes were reflected ..... not exist as of today since mpd-2001 was brought in force in august 1990.55. petitioners relied upon decision of a learned single judge of this court : 101(2002)dlt125 , holistic farms p. ltd. v. mcd. said decision pertains to an issue where master plan norms were changed on 23.7.1998 permitting increased covered area and ..... on the basis that the aforesaid construction is un-authorised under the act and bye-laws made there under.'39. for record, i do not find any order, much less an application seeking leave to amend the petition by changing the prayers. be that as it may, amended petition has come on record without any opposition or objection.40. on .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-21-2005
Reported in : 2005CriLJ3861; 121(2005)DLT595
..... dismissed.(3) the plaint shall set forth that a notice as aforesaid has been served on the defendant and the date of such service and shall state what tender of amends, if any, has been made by the defendant and a copy of the said notice shall be annexed to the plaint endorsed or accompanied with a declaration by the ..... found that the order of court of sessions requiring the magistrate to arrest and commit the appellant along with accused proposed to be committed to stand trial before him was patently illegal and beyond jurisdiction. eventually, the supreme court directed the magistrate to perform its function under section 209 of the code but left it open to the court of ..... . if it is so, the prosecution has to be instituted within three months from the date on which the act was committed. admittedly, the fir itself was recorded very late and by the time the impugned order was passed on 8.8.2002, 19 months had elapsed from the date of the offence. in prof. sumerhand v. union of india and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-07-2005
Reported in : 118(2005)DLT418; 2005(81)DRJ238
..... guidelines framed there under and had prayed for equitable reliefs, so as to ameliorate the hardships and difficulties encountered by them in the wake of proposed amended guidelines laying the eligibility and examination system for grant of licenses. as noted earlier, the respondents in the revised proposed guidelines filed, have attempted to remove ..... grievances and giving necessary directions, where required, to the respondents to consider and take appropriate decisions.29. as per the estimates of figures worked out in 2002, there were 700 regional level licensed tourist guides. as a result of the petitions filed in this court, it is estimated that more than 1000 ..... permission. the rule in question not only regulates the actual entry in the precincts of the monuments but also controls the user of the monument. the act and the rules in question raise the citizens' sense of responsibility in protecting and maintaining these monuments of national importance in their original form. this .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-04-2005
Reported in : 120(2005)DLT656
..... plr 381 in the context of exercise of power under section 67(1) of the punjab municipal act, 1911, which is in pari material with section 126(1) of the act, vis--vis the amendment of assessment list. the court held that: it follows that the municipal committee should inform the ..... be said to be in accordance with law, since it contained vague reasons. the notice indicated, against the heading reasons in brief for amendment in the assessment list the following grounds:erroneously valued increase in rent. alteration/ renovation 7. the notice proposed to increase the existing rateable ..... s. ravindra bhat, j.1. in this letters patent appeal, the judgment and order of a learned single judge, allowing the writ petition of mcd ( wp 6935 ..... section 444 of the act, when it would be delivered in the ordinary course of post, unless a contrary date is proved.3. the judgment under appeal dated 27.2.04, has relied upon the decision in municipal corporation of delhi v. r.k. khandelwal, : 101(2002)dlt169 . that .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-04-2005
Reported in : 120(2005)DLT588
..... have given notice to the assessed. fourthly, learned counsel placed considerable emphasis on the expression at any time occurring in section 126(1) of the act to say that the assessment list could be amended at any time. hence, it is contended, the giving of notice is merely procedural, and meant to sub-serve the primary objective of having ..... the additional district judge, and affirmed by the learned single judge, namely, rathi's case has since been reviewed by an order of this court dated 20th september, 2002 which had recalled the order and left the question open for decision. eventually, the division bench dismissed that appeal. thirdly, it is contended that the giving of a ..... s. ravindra bhat, j.1. the present appeal under letters patent is directed against the judgment and order of a learned single judge dated 21st february, 2002, rejecting the writ petition preferred by the appellant (hereafter called mcd ). the issue involved is what is meant by to give a notice, as per sections 126(2 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-03-2005
Reported in : 127(2006)DLT801
..... at a stage prior to issuance of notification under section 4, in all events and to bind the state by the same, leaving any leverage for the planned development or amended planned development of delhi. in this regard reference can be made to the judgment of the supreme court in the case of bhagat singh (supra), where the court held as ..... mind before issuance of such a notification. in this regard, we may also refer to the judgment of the even date in the case of w.p.(c) no. 7446/2002 decided on february 03, 2005.28. in the case of chameli singh and ors. vs. state of u.p. and anr. : air1996sc1051 the supreme court stated that in any ..... stand taken on behalf of the land and building department is that the petitioner society had no right to construct the colonies in contravention of the delhi land reforms act, delhi development act and master plan of delhi. it was stated that the said persons do not reside there, nor carry any agricultural activity. the society is stated to be developing .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-03-2005
Reported in : 127(2006)DLT826
..... purpose. similarly, there can be no dispute and indeed no such dispute was raised by learned counsels for the petitioners that the master plan for delhi can always be amended for the planned development of vasant kunj phase-iv. if acquisition of land was in anticipation of this proposal of planned development, no fault can be found in the ..... it. (see raja anand brahma shah vs. state of uttar pradesh and ors., : [1967]1scr373 and first land acquisition collector and ors. vs. nirodhi prakash gangoli and anr., : [2002]2scr326 .the above principles of law have been followed by this court in m/s sri ballabh marbles and ors. vs. kawaljeet singh and anr., w.p. (c) nos. 4933 ..... are submitted for approval of lt. governor for issue of notifications u/s. 4, 6 and 17 of la act. after taking decision on the above said points i and ii in the preceding para the notifications will be suitable amended.submitted please.20. it is quite clear from a reading of the above that the basic difference in procedure .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-02-2005
Reported in : 118(2005)DLT694; 2005(81)DRJ591
..... process of reasoning. where two inferences are reasonably possible and the subordinate court has chosen to take one view, the error cannot be called gross or patent.-----------------------------------(8) the high court in exercise of certiorari or supervisory jurisdiction will not convert itself into a court of appeal and indulge in depreciation or evaluation of ..... on clear ignorance or utter disregard of the provisions of law, and (ii) a grave injustice or gross failure of justice has occasioned thereby.(6) a patent error is an error which is self-evident i.e. which can be perceived or demonstrated without involving into any lengthy or complicated argument or a long- ..... time being in force but subject to any rules that may be made under this act, the managing officer or managing corporation may cancel any allotment or amend the terms of any allotment under which any evacuee property acquired under this act is held or occupied by a person, whether such allotment was granted before or after .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-01-2005
Reported in : III(2005)BC511; 119(2005)DLT196; 2005(81)DRJ708
..... than one occasion; it does not stipulate that this can be done even beyond ninety days. assuming that this rule has application post the code of civil procedure (amendment) act, 2002 it can, along with order viii rule 1, be simultaneously given effect to by imparting the interpretation that the court may permit several opportunities to file written statement provided ..... because the logic applied by the supreme court would apply more effectively to the original side rules of this court also which is not the creation of a letters patent but a statute enacted by the parliament. as such, no fine distinction or any hair-splitting can be made on the plea that this supreme court judgment was ..... . the case before the supreme court was that the powers of the chartered high courts to make rules on its original side was itself derived from the letters patent and that the non-obstante clause in section 129 cpc could not be construed as a departure from the entire body of cpc so as to render the rules .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-01-2005
Reported in : 118(2005)DLT152; 2005(81)DRJ399
..... : 84(2000)dlt672 m/s premier auto electric ltd. v. jitender kumar budhiraja.22. final submission made was that the amendment to order 8 rule 1 to the code of civil procedure by act no. 22 of 2002 makes the legislative intent clear, namely, written statement should not be permitted to be filed beyond 90 days of service of ..... where the defendant has no substantial defense, a vague written statement is filed and just before the stage of issues is reached, out pops an application for amendment. all kinds of ruse are contrived to delay trial.39.i do not find that the defendant has shown sufficient and good cause to be entitled for enlargement ..... inherent powers cannot be exercised to override express provision of law. mr. chaudhary relied upon the following decisions:-(i) : [1971]1scr207 nainsingh v. koonwarjee and ors.;(ii) : [2002]1scr586 p.purushottam reddy and anr. v. pratap steels ltd.;(iii) : 85(2000)dlt60 bansal trading corporation v. morgan asia ltd.;(iv) (88) 2000 dlt 377 kuldeep singh .....
Tag this Judgment!