Court : Delhi
Reported in : 156(2009)DLT133
s. muralidhar, j.introduction1. the subject matter of all these petitions is land to an extent of over 40 bighas in village kapashera, new delhi belonging to the deputy commissioner (south-west) ('dc'), government of national territory of delhi ('gnctd'). the dc is the petitioner in the first mentioned writ petition w.p. (c) no. 7687 of 2004 accordingly, all these petitions, including the two contempt petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.relevant facts2. on 17th april 1986 a notification was issued under section 14 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 ('holdings act') by the competent authority commencing the process of consolidation of land in the village kapashera in new delhi. pursuant to the said notification dated 17th april 1986 the consolidation officer ('co') published a draft scheme under section 19 of the holdings act on 19th december 1986. after considering the objections the scheme was confirmed by the settlement officer (consolidation) on 24th july 1987. thereafter repartition under section 21(1) of the holdings act was announced by a resolution no. 14 dated 13th/20th july 1988.3. it is stated that land to an extent of over 40 bighas in village kapashera stood recorded in the name of the dc since 1924 and has been in the possession of the dc since then. on 6th december 1991 the consolidation scheme which had been announced in 1986 was amcnded in terms of section 36 of the holdings act. the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2007(2)ARBLR256(Delhi)
a.k. sikri, j.1. the petitioner in this petition, filed under section 9 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 (for short, 'the act'), is aggrieved against the action of the respondent no. 2 delhi transport corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'dtc') in inviting tenders from national and international firms/joint ventures/consortium for allotment of about 225 shelters/sites on but basis against display of commercial advertisement thereon, as according to the petitioner it is given the contract for these sites and during the currency of the license agreement with the petitioner, the respondent no. 2 cannot take such a step.2. first, the factual matrix to appreciate the grievance of the petitioner. as per the averments in the petition, dtc had earlier issued a tender pursuant where to the petitioner had also submitted its bid. this tender was for grant of advertisement rights on all the shelters (bqs/tkb) of the dtc falling in various zones and was for a period of three years. the petitioner was successful bidder in respect of ten zones and the dtc issues letter of award in respect of these zones on the monthly license fee. the particulars of these zones, security deposit by the petitioner in respect thereof, monthly license fee payable and the contract period for these zones are indicated in the following table:s. no. zone security license fee/month contract period(rs.) (rs.)1. rohini-ii 36,12,504 12,04,168 3.11.04 - 8.11.072. shahdara(n)-i 15,12,504 5,04,168 8.11.04 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
j.d. kapoor, president (oral): 1. complainants are u.s. citizens. they had purchased two round trip tickets from delhi in the business class on may 15, 1999 bearing no. 117-6894467851-54 with flight sectors as delhi-copenhagen-newark-copenhagen-nice-copenhagen-delhi. on this sector-2 checked in baggages are allowed with maximum weights of 64 kgs. on may 23, 2000 the complainant boarded the sas flight at newark at 18.15 hours and checked their luggage. at the time of receiving the baggage from the complainants no objection was raised by the op and the baggage was cleared since it was found within the permissible limits. the baggage was received at copenhagen airport. except for the bare minimum required by the complainants the rest of their luggage was deposited in the left luggage facility as the complainants were proceeding to nice for few days. the complainants boarded the sas flight from copenhagen to nice at 10.45 hrs on may 24th 2000. in nice they did not check in their baggage. they retained it as hand baggage. from nice lyon-nice the complainants travelled by air france. complainants were instructed by the officials of air france at lyon to check in their hand baggage, which would accordingly be off-load at copenhagen. the sas flight from nice to copenhagen was delayed, with the result that only about an hour was left for them to board the flight to delhi. the complainants retrieved their luggage from the left-luggage counter at copenhagen and sought to check it in on .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 119(2005)DLT567; 2005(82)DRJ22
mukul mudgal, j.1. rule. with the consent of the counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing.2. this petition under article 227 under article 227 of the constitution of india, challenges the order dated 27th july, 2004, passed by the additional district judge in hma. no. 591 of 2004, by which an application moved by which an application moved on 13th july, 2004 by both the parties, that is, the petitioner, sh. tarun kumar vaish and the respondent ms. meenakshi vaish, seeking permission to present the petition under section 13b of the hindu marriage act, 1955(in short the `hma') for divorce, by mutual consent prior to the expiry of one year from the date of marriage of the parties, that is, 30th april, 2004 was rejected and accordingly the petition under section 13b of the hma act was dismissed.3. the relevant portion of the proviso to section 14 of the hma reads as follows:-'14(1) notwithstanding anything contained in this act, it shall not be competent for any court to entertain any petition for dissolution of a marriage by a decree of divorce, [unless at the date of the presentation of the petition one year has elapsed since the date of the marriage : provided that the court may, upon application made to it in accordance with such rules as may be made by the high court in that behalf, allow a petition to be presented [before one year has elapsed] since the date of the marriage on the ground that the case is one of exceptional hardship to the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1975Delhi117
1. this is a tenant's appeal from the order of the rent control tribunal dated april 30, 1974.2. the facts are these. the appellant no. 1 vishwa nath carried on the business of advertising under the name and style of interads international advertising agency. he was the sole proprietor of this business. on november 1, 1962 he took one room 9 x 20 feet on the back side in a building bearing no. 6/4 asaf ali road. delhi on a monthly rent of rs, 100/-. this room is being used as an office. chaman lal khanna, advocate, and his three sons are the landlords of that building. they are respondents 1 to 4.3. vishwa nath thought of expending his business. in 1964 he formed a limited company. he called it interads advertising (p.) limited ('the company'), from 1962 till the beginning of 1964 he paid rent in the name of interads international advertising agency. after the formation of the company in 1964 the company started paying rent. rent was being paid by pre-receipted cheques. at the reverse of the cheque a receipt was printed. the receipt is in these terms:'received from m/s. interads advertising (p.) ltd. the sum stated on the other side of this cheque signature of payee ......... date ....................................... note: the above signatures are intended to be a receipt only.'4. in the beginning vishwa nath, appellant no. 1, and later on the company appellant no. 2 used to send the pre-receipted cheques to the landlords. mr. chaman lal khanna, respondent no. 1, would .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* in the high court of delhi at new delhi % judgment reserved on: november 09, 2016 judgment delivered on: august 08, 2018 + crl.a. 951/2015 anand vishwa @ bishwa ..... appellant the cbi represented by: mr. abhishek vikram with ms. vasundara chauhan, advs. versus represented by: mr.sanjeev bhandari, spp with ..... respondent + crl.a. 684/2016 mr. manoj bhandari, adv. central bureau of investigation ..... appellant represented by: mr.sanjeev bhandari, spp with mr. manoj bhandari, adv. versus anand vishwa @ bishwa & anr ........ respondents represented by: mr. abhishek vikram with ms. vasundara chauhan, advs. for r-1. mr. jivesh tiwari with ms. suman chauhan, adv. for r-2. crl.a. 1286/2014 + faris shuja jalali @ anup ..... appellant mr. jivesh tiwari with ms. suman chauhan, adv. for r-2. versus the cbi represented by: mr.sanjeev bhandari, spp with ..... respondent mr. manoj bhandari, adv. page 1 of 15 coram: hon'ble ms. justice mukta gupta mukta gupta, j.1. vide impugned judgment dated july 07, 2014, anand vishwa @ bishwa, the appellant in crl.a.951/2015 and faris shuja jalali @ anup, the appellant in crl.a.1284/2014 were convicted for offence punishable under section 5 of immoral traffic (prevention) act (in short itp act ). anand vishwa @ bishwa was acquitted for the offences punishable section 120b read with section 420/366/372/373 ipc and substantive offences punishable under sections 420/366a/372 ipc. faris shuja jalali @ anup was acquitted for the offences punishable .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* in the high court of delhi at new delhi % judgment reserved on: november 09, 2016 judgment delivered on: august 08, 2018 + crl.a. 951/2015 anand vishwa @ bishwa ..... appellant the cbi represented by: mr. abhishek vikram with ms. vasundara chauhan, advs. versus represented by: mr.sanjeev bhandari, spp with ..... respondent + crl.a. 684/2016 mr. manoj bhandari, adv. central bureau of investigation ..... appellant represented by: mr.sanjeev bhandari, spp with mr. manoj bhandari, adv. versus anand vishwa @ bishwa & anr ........ respondents represented by: mr. abhishek vikram with ms. vasundara chauhan, advs. for r-1. mr. jivesh tiwari with ms. suman chauhan, adv. for r-2. crl.a. 1286/2014 + faris shuja jalali @ anup ..... appellant mr. jivesh tiwari with ms. suman chauhan, adv. for r-2. versus the cbi represented by: mr.sanjeev bhandari, spp with ..... respondent mr. manoj bhandari, adv. page 1 of 15 coram: hon'ble ms. justice mukta gupta mukta gupta, j.1. vide impugned judgment dated july 07, 2014, anand vishwa @ bishwa, the appellant in crl.a.951/2015 and faris shuja jalali @ anup, the appellant in crl.a.1284/2014 were convicted for offence punishable under section 5 of immoral traffic (prevention) act (in short itp act ). anand vishwa @ bishwa was acquitted for the offences punishable section 120b read with section 420/366/372/373 ipc and substantive offences punishable under sections 420/366a/372 ipc. faris shuja jalali @ anup was acquitted for the offences punishable .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (2000)(67)ECC658
1. these are a group of three appeals against three orders passed by collector (appeals), meerut. one of the appeals viz., appeal no.e/657/93-d has been filed by the revenue and the other two, by m/s.vishwa rattan refractories (p) ltd. since the parties to the three appeals are common, they were heard together and is being disposed of by this common order.2. shri v. sridharan, ld. advocate appeared for m/s. vishwa rattan refractories (p) ltd., and shri a.k. agarwal, ld. jdr appeared for the department.3. first we take up the two appeals filed by m/s. vishwa rattan refractories (p) ltd. ('vr' for short), vr were engaged in the manufacture of fire clay refractories falling under erstwhile t.i. 68 and presently under chapter heading no. 6901 of the central excise tariff act, 1985. they were also availing of small scale exemption under notification no. 175/86 as amended. the case of the department is that with effect from 30-10-1987 and upto november, 1988, vr had become ineligible for the benefit of notification no. 175/86 since vr were registered with the director general of technical development (dgtd) and therefore they had become ineligible for ssi exemption in terms of paragraph 4(b) of that notification as amended by notification no.244/87. on 30-10-1987 by notification no. 244/87 ssi notification no.175/86 was amended excluding from the purview of paragraph 4(b) of the parent notification 175/86, units which were registered under the industries development and regulation .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* % + in the high court of delhi at new delhi date of decision:4. h july, 2019 cs(os) 119/2019 the vishwa nath & santosh bakshi charitable educational trust (regd.) & anr. ..... plaintiffs through: mr. amitabh chaturvedi & mr. sangeeth mohan, advs. versus ..... defendant through: mr. gautam narayan & ms. dacchita shahi & ms. shivani vij, advs. for gnctd. mr. akshay makhija, adv., amicus curiae. coram: hon'ble mr. justice rajiv sahai endlaw1 the vishwa nath and santosh bakshi charitable educational trust (regd.) and its trustee sharad malik have instituted this proceeding (as a suit) under section 7(1) of the charitable & religious trusts act, 1920 (crt act) read with principles of section 34 of the indian trusts act, 1882, pleading that (i) plot no.6/22, shanti niketan, new delhi ad-measuring 393 sq. yds. was allotted by delhi development authority (dda) in equal shares to vishwa nath bakshi and his wife santosh bakshi who were members of government servants co-operative house building society which had developed the colony of shanti niketan and a perpetual sub lease dated 26th october, 1968 was executed by dda in their favour; the said vishwa nath bakshi and santosh bakshi constructed a double storeyed house on the said plot of land; no children were born to vishwa nath bakshi cs(os) no.119/2019 page 1 of 23 and santosh bakshi; (ii) vishwa nath bakshi died intestate on 29th may, 1996 and his 50% undivided share in the aforesaid property was mutated in the name of santosh .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * + in the high court of delhi at new delhi reserved on:6. h november, 2019 pronounced on:27. h november, 2019 crl.m.c. 4551/2018 and crl.m.a.31631/2018, 35622- 35623/2018, 5574/2019 salman khurshid ........ petitioner through: mr. sidharth luthra, senior advocate with mr. aadil singh boparai, ms. sakshi kotiyal, mr. shivanshu singh & mr. prithvi narula, mr. pramod kumar dubey and mr. kushank sindhu, advocates along with petitioner in person. versus state nct of delhi & ors. ........ respondents through: ms. meenakshi chauhan, app for state with si rakesh kumar, ps amar colony mr. puneet mittal, senior advocate with ms. vasudha bajaj & mr. a.gupta, advocates for r-5. + crl.m.c. 5069/2018 and crl.m.a.33507/2018 s.r vaish ........ petitioner through: mr. madhav khurana, advocate with mr. nitin saluja, mr. mudit gupta, mr. varun singh, mr. aman panwar, mr. akshay, & mr. harsh g. advocates versus crl. m.c. 4551/2018 & ors. page 1 of 31 state & ors. ........ respondents through: ms. meenakshi chauhan, app for state with si rakesh kumar, ps amar colony mr. puneet mittal, senior advocate with ms. vasudha bajaj, mr. rupendra pratap singh, & mr. a.gupta, advocates for r-3 & r-4. + crl.m.c. 175/2019 and crl.m.a.5611/2019 state ........ petitioner through: ms. meenakshi chauhan, app for state with si rakesh kumar, ps amar colony versus dr. sharda nayak ..... respondent through: mr. siddharth luthra, senior advocate with ms. mumtaz bhalla, mr. aadil singh boparai, ms. ritika ahuja & .....
Tag this Judgment!