I.L.R. (2011) III (JUNE) DELHI.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
I.L.R. (2011) III DELHI Part-II (June, 2011) P.S.D. 25.6.2011 (Pages 455-820) 650 Annual Subscription rate of I.L.R.(D.S.) 2011 INDIAN LAW REPORTS (for 6 volumes each volume consisting of 2 Parts) DELHI SERIES In Indian Rupees : 2500/- 2011 Single Part : 250/- (Containing cases determined by the High Court of Delhi) VOLUME-3, PART-II (CONTAINS GENERAL INDEX) EDITOR for Subscription Please Contact : MR. A.S. YADAV REGISTRAR (VIGILANCE) Controller of Publications CO-EDITORS Department of Publication, Govt. of India, MS. NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA Civil Lines, Delhi-110054. (ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGES) Website: www.deptpub.nic.in REPORTERS Email:[email protected] (&) [email protected] Tel.: 23817823/9689/3761/3762/3764/3765 MR. CHANDER SHEKHAR MS. ANU BAGAI Fax.: 23817876 MR. TALWANT SINGH MR. SANJOY GHOSE MR. GIRISH KATHPALIA MR. K. PARMESHWAR MS. SHALINDER KAUR (ADVOCATES) MR. V.K. BANSAL MR. KESHAV K. BHATI MR. L.K. GAUR DEPUTY REGISTRAR MR. GURDEEP SINGH MS. ADITI CHAUDHARY MR. ARUN BHARDWAJ (ADDITIONAL DISTRICT PRINTED BY : J.R. COMPUTERS, 477/7, MOONGA NAGAR, & SESSIONS JUDGES) KARAWAL NAGAR ROAD DELHI-110094. AND PUBLISHED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF HIGH COURT OF DELHI, PUBLISHED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF HIGH COURT OF DELHI, BY THE CONTROLLER OF PUBLICATIONS, DELHI-110054—2011. BY THE CONTROLLER OF PUBLICATIONS, DELHI-110054. INDIAN LAW REPORTS (DELHI SERIES) NEW FEATURES 1. I.L.R. (D.S.) has now six volumes each part contains about 500 pages to cover more Judgments. 2. Statute section is also introduced in the I.L.R. (D.S.) to cover rules & regulation relating to Delhi High Court. 3. Annual Subscription rate for I.L.R.(D.S.) Rate for Single Part : Rs. 250/- Rate for Annual Subscription : Rs. 2500/- FOR SUBSCRIPTION PLEASE CONTACT : Controller of Publications Department of Publication, Govt. of India, Civil Lines, Delhi-110054. Website: www.deptpub.nic.in Email:[email protected] (&) [email protected] Tel.: 23817823/9689/3761/3762/3764/3765 Fax.: 23817876 (ii) Ballabh Das Aggarwal (Decd.) v. Union of India & Ors. ........................ 606 NOMINAL-INDEX VOLUME-3, PART-II JUNE, 2011 The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. M/s. T.T. Finance Ltd. & Ors. ........................................................................................ 625 Pages Ashok Chawla v. Ram Chander Garvan, Inspector CBI ......................... 638 Misri Devi & Ors. v. State ....................................................................... 455 Vibhor Anand v. Vice Chancellor, Guru Gobind Singh I.P. Management of Apparel Export Promotion Council v. University & Ors. .............................................................................. 654 Surya Prakash .................................................................................... 464 Delhi Transport Coporation v. Sh. Manmohan ........................................ 663 The Commissioner of Income-Tax-IV v. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd. ............................................................................................. 475 Shri Ganga Dutt v. Union of India & Ors. ............................................... 677 M.C. Sharma v. UOI & Ors. ................................................................... 491 Tata Finance Ltd. v. P.S. Mangla & Ors. ................................................ 682 All India Institute of Medical Sciences v. Sanjay Kumar & Anr. ............ 495 Ram Saran @ Balli v. State....................................................................... 722 Smt. Vidya Devi v. Smt. Ramwati Devi .................................................. 502 Poonam Sharma v. Union of India & Ors. .............................................. 739 Nakul Kapur v. NDMC & Ors. ................................................................ 510 Promod Tandon v. Anil Tandon............................................................... 762 P.M. Lalitha Lekha v. Lt. Governor & Ors. ............................................ 525 D.K. Sharma v. Union of India & Ors. .................................................... 769 Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi v. Navin Talwar ........................... 536 Shailendra Nath Endlay & Anr. v. Kuldip Gandotra ................................ 783 New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Sushila & Ors. ................................... 543 Smt. Guddo @ Sonia v. State .................................................................. 800 Girdhari Lal Goomer v. P.P. Gambhir ..................................................... 553 Gurdwara Shri Guru Singh Sabha & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. ...... 558 Rashid & Ors. v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi ....................................... 571 Prashant Projects (P) Ltd. v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd................................ 586 G.E. Capital Transportation Financial Services Ltd. v. Lakhmanbhai Govindbhai Karmur Creative Construction & Ors. .... 595 (i) SUBJECT-INDEX (iv) VOLUME-3, PART-II This submission is wholly misplaced. Held: No legally tenable JUNE, 2011 grounds of judicial review. CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE ACT, 1949—Section Poonam Sharma v. Union of India & Ors. .................. 739 11—Petition assailing the order dated 17.04.1990, whereby she was removed from service after departmental inquiry and CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908—Suit—Order 26 Rule the appellate order dated 03.08.1990, whereby her appeal 9—Appointment of Local Commissioner—Delhi High Court against the removed order had been dismissed—Petitioner Act, 1966—Section 10—Appeal—Maintainability of—Plaintiff joined the Central Reserve Police Force as Mahila Sub- filed an application for appointment for Local Commissioner Inspector in 1986—In October 1987, petitioner sought for carrying out measurement of work done by plaintiff—Ld. permission from the department to appear in the Combined Single Judge opined—Appropriate course would be to get States Service Examination, 1987—Permission granted— measurements done on its own level from expert independent Petitioner was granted one day casual leave for 08.02.1988 body—Local commissioner not required to be appointed— to appear in the aforesaid examination—On 08.02.1988, Dismissed the application—Preferred appeal against the Kumari Mamta Sabharwal, reportedly a friend and neighbour order—Respondent contended—Real purpose behind the of the petitioner was caught impersonating the petitioner and application to nullify the joint inspection carried out by writing her answer sheet in the examination—Kumari Mamta parties—Court after going through the record, found substance Sabharwal gave a handwritten statement admitting that she was in the arguments—Observed—Plaintiff's refusal to carry out impersonating as the petitioner thereby defrauding the inspection/measurement by its own engineer indicative of examination authorities on the request/advice of petitioner— oblique and malafide purpose behind the application for Inquiry conducted—Petitioner held guilty and order passed— appointment of local co ` mmissioner—Carrying out Petition—Held—Failure to maintain integrity and honesty in measurements not only method by which plaintiff could prove public examination would be covered within the meaning of the extent of work done by it—Must have possessed sufficient expression “other misconduct” as defined under Section 11 documents of its own showing—Deployment of man power, (1) of the CRPF Act, 1949—The petitioner has not ceased to utilisation of material and resources at site, to be dealt with in be a member of the force on 8th February, 1988 when she detail in arbitration proceedings—Held—The appeal is was appearing in the Combined State Service Examination, maintainable against an interlocutory order having traits and 1987—The petitioner though not on duty, did not cease to be traping of finality—Court possesses power for appointment a member of the force—The petitioner is a member of the of Local Commissioner but to exercise such power depend disciplined force—It needs no elaboration that integrity and on the peculiarity of factual matrix—It can scarcely be claimed dignity of the service with which she is employed, is required that local commissioner should be appointed to nullify the joint to be observed at all times—The petitioner who was the sub- measurements in the face of offer of defendant to plaintiff to inspector, was taking the examination as an in service carry out measurements on its own—Appeal dismissed. candidate—Causing any person to impersonate the service Prashant Projects (P) Ltd. v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. .. 586 personnel in an examination with dishonest intention is reprehensible and certainly misconduct of the highest level— — Order 9, Rule 13—Petitioner preferred writ petition challenging The challenge is solely premised on the plea that the acts order of trial Court dismissing her application seeking attributed to the petitioner are not relatable to her service— condonation of delay in moving application under Order 9, (iii) Rule 13—As per petitioner, she came to know of ex-parte (v) (vi) judgment and decree dt. 08.01.1997 on 24.12.1999 when she by trial Court on ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction— received notice from Court in another case—She handed over ASJ dismissed criminal revision—Held, the two acts of notice to her Advocate who did not take steps and expired presentation of cheque and issuance of legal notice from Delhi, on 21.01.2000—Thereafter she managed to get back notice so also the fact that loan agreement executed at Delhi and loan and engaged new counsel on 29.01.2000, who inspected disbursed to respondent from account of petitioner in