Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-11-2001
Reported in : 94(2001)DLT511; 2001(60)DRJ321
..... prove the issue as framed. after all the present suit is not for giving effect to the alleged settlement or the alleged decision of the mediators/arbitrators nor any issue is framed therein.13. the result of the aforesaid discussion coupled with the judgments cited by the learned counsel for defendant ..... in question. when the will is otherwise proved, which was in fact in the handwriting of the testator himself, merely because parties decided to seek mediation to resolve the disputes, notwithstanding this will, it would not go to show that there was no will in existence. it is a matter of ..... while in his statement before the court he has denied the suggestion that he has put any pressure on the defendant no.1 to agree for mediation. he has admitted that he has lodged two criminal complaints against his brother. he accepts rs. 10,000/- being received from defendant no.1 ..... of defendants. the submission of learned counsel was that had there been any will in existence, defendant no. 1 would not have agreed for the mediation by the aforesaid committee and in any case, would have mentioned about that will at that time. this, according to him, shows that will is ..... having received interest on the fixed deposit as well as rent for the rented portion of the karol bagh house. the plaintiff further states that the mediators suggested mode of partition as also provisions for various liabilities and customary obligations. however, besides being in possession of ground floor of karol bagh house, .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-30-2001
Reported in : 2003(1)ARBLR313(Delhi); 2002(63)DRJ82
..... form of arbitral award. at the most it is a private settlement between the parties which results in temporary, termination of the proceedings.13. settlement of the parties either through mediation or conciliation or as a result of their own efforts does not tantamount to an arbitral award or the culmination of the arbitral proceedings. it is an agreement for settlement .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-11-2001
Reported in : 2002CriLJ505; 94(2001)DLT584; I(2002)DMC67; 2001(60)DRJ791
..... in-laws were not happy and she was taunted and harassed by her in-laws but she continued to bear the cruelties. efforts made to reconcile the matter through the mediator did not yield any result. the girl was sent back twice or thrice. in the marriage a 'bajaj super scooter' was given to the boy which was replaced on the ..... daughter was sent back requiring her to bring rs. 1.0 lac to enable her husband to start some business. on the next day he along with his daughter and mediator went to house of the petitioners and gave rs. 10,000/- to them. they became angry and with great difficulty they could be persuaded to accept that amount. she was .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-16-2001
Reported in : 95(2002)DLT39; 2002(61)DRJ774
..... a matter like this. on 15.10.2001 counsel for the parties sought further time to arrive at an amicable settlement. ms. avnish ahlawat, advocate, was requested to help and mediate in the matter.7. after hearing counsel for the parties and the office bearers of shri dharmik ramlila committee and shri dharmik sabha, i find that it is the desire .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-22-2001
Reported in : 2001IIIAD(Delhi)468; 90(2001)DLT423; 2001(59)DRJ112
..... that they would meet constable bhupender singh and pw-6 at the place of occurrence. not it was prosecution's case that the accused persons had any intention or pre-mediated to kill constable bhupender singh. in fact deceased bhupender singh confronted the accused and reminded them of their involvements in the sale of smack which allegations according to mr. thakur .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Jun-01-2001
..... submits that there was not physical removal of the self-copying paper. he submits that the applicants is manufacturing paper stationery in continuous form of paper and in the inter-mediate stage, some self-copying paper emerges which cannot at all be removed physically. he submitted that a number of opinions on the issue were furnished which were not taken into .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-03-2001
Reported in : 2001VAD(Delhi)620; 92(2001)DLT246; 2001(60)DRJ277
ordermanmohan sarin, j.1. rule.2. with the consent of the parties writ petition is taken up for disposal.3. the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking quashing of the impugned orders dated 17.11.1999 and 25.11.1999, by which the mutation of property no.97/109, nehru place, new delhi, was modified to be in the joint names of the petitioner and one ms.ruby arora. the property earlier stood mutated in the name of petitioner alone.4. learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the writ petition had urged that there was non-compliance with the statutory provision of section 126 of delhi municipal corporation act, 1957, which reads as under:126. amendment of assessment list (1) the commissioner may, at any time, amend the assessment list:-(a) by inserting therein the name of any person whose name ought to be inserted; or(b) by inserting therein any land or building previously omitted; or(c) by striking out the name of any person not liable for the payment of property taxes; or(d) by increasing or reducing for adequate reasons the amount of any rateable value and of the assessment thereupon; or(e) by making or cancelling any entry exempting any land or building from liability to any property tax; or(f) by altering the assessment on the land or building which has been erroneously valued or assessed through fraud, mistake or accident; or(g) by inserting or altering any entry in respect of any building erected, re-erected, altered or added to, after preparation of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-12-2001
Reported in : 94(2001)DLT939A
devinder gupta, j.1. we have heard learned counsel for the appellant at the preliminary hearing of this appeal, who has taken us through the entire record of the trial court.2. this first appeals has been preferred by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree passed on 15.10.1998 by shri lal singh, additional district judge, delhi in suit no. 264/90 decreeing her suit for declaration to the effect that plaintiff shanti devi has inherited 1/2 share in the residential property ad-measuring about 500 sq. yards from out of land comprised in khasra no. 361/2, situate in village sultanpur, tehsil mehrauli, new delhi. the plaintiff/ appellant has felt aggrieved against that part of the judgment and decree by which her sit for the reliefs prayed has been dismissed.3. one ramji lal son of nathan, was co-bhumidar in agricultural land situate in village sultanpur, tehsil mehrauli, new delhi and an absolute owner in possession of single storey residential house comprised in an area of about 500 sq. yards from out of land comprised in khasra no. 360/1-2 situate at sultan pur, new delhi ramji lal expired on 28.1.1983. mutation of inheritance was sanctioned on 30.3.1983 in favor of hem chander, respondent as his son. feeling aggrieved by the order of attestation of mutation smt. khazani and shanti devi, widow and daughter respectively of ramji lal filed suit on 15.1.1996 claiming a decree for declaration in their favor against the defendant to the effect that khazani devi, widow of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-13-2001
Reported in : 2001(59)DRJ801
orderj.d. kapoor, j.1. clumsiness in human relations knows no bounds. the plaintiff wants to evict his son and grant-son from the house which once was owned by his mother and gifted to him subsequently as he and his wife are allegedly being beaten and subjected to humiliation on daily basis.2. the plaintiff has two more sons who are living in the same house. however defendants 1 & 2 have been harassing and abusing the plaintiff and his wife and on few occasions even physically assaulted them in order to pressurise them to leave the house of which the plaintiff is the absolute the exclusive owner. so much so they were insulted, humiliated before the people of locality and intervention by relatives and friends has not helped the parties in resolving their disputes.3. the defendants started staking their claim in the suit property when they were asked to vacate the premises because of their highly unbecoming conduct culminating in physical beating to the plaintiff and his wife and when they started threatening to dispossess them by bringing in outsiders to terrorise them, the plaintiff was constrained to seek the relief of possession and permanent injunction against the defendants for peaceful enjoyment of the first floor of the suit property.4. on the other hand, the defendants allege that the plaintiff is under the evil influence of his other two sons and is so ungrateful that inspire of having lived with them and availed their services and attention for a very long period .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-09-2001
Reported in : 97(2002)DLT49; 2002(61)DRJ295
v.s. aggarwal, j.1. plaintiff sri ram malik is the son of chander bhan malik. chander bhan malik is the common ancestral and died in 31st august, 1989. he left behind his widow, defendant, no. 1 smt. sumitra devi, three other sons narinder kumar malik, defendant no. 2, rajinder kumar malik, defendant no. 3 and raj kumar malik, defendant no. 4 besides two daughters santosh katyal and saroj madan, arrayed as defendants 5 and 6.2. the plaintiff has filled the present suit for partition, declaration, rendition of accounts, mesne profits and other reliefs, pleading, inter alia, that his father chander bhan malik during his life time acquired and owned extensive properties both immovable and movable. it included the following properties:'(i) shop no. a-1041, new subzi mandi azadpur, delhi. (ii) house no. 253, sarai pipal thala, khasra no. 738/215, bearing khewat khara no. 14/29, area measuring 182 sq. yards, situated in the revenue estate of pipal thala, delhi; (iii) residential plot no. 2451, (measuring 160 sq. yards) situated at hudson lines, kingsway camp, delhi-110019; (iv) shop no. a-290, situated at azadpur, new subzi mandi, delhi.' 3. the said properties were self-acquired properties of t he deceased. the deceased is alleged to have died intestate and plaintiff claims that he has 1/7th share in the properties. after the death of the father of the plaintiff property bearing no. a-1041 new subzi mandi, azadpur is stated to be in possession of defendants 3 and 4. property .....Tag this Judgment!