Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 1531 (1.34 seconds)
Documents citing Satyawati Sharma (Dead) By Lrs vs Union Of India & Another on 16 April, 2008

Rajbir Pal & Anr. vs Kanwar Partap Singh on 25 April, 2023

32. Moreover, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners has raised the above argument previously as well in the earlier petition for revision in R.C. Rev. No. 209/2010 and this Court vide Order dated 12.10.2011 has aptly referred Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL SINGH RC.REV. 30/2022 Page 56 of 78 Signing Date:25.04.2023 19:09:27 Neutral Citation Number is 2023:DHC:2783 to a Judgement of a Division Bench of this Court in Indian Airlines v. Union of India and Ors, 128 (2006) DLT 505, and observed that decisions of the Supreme Court cannot be assailed before the High Court, and that this Court is bound to follow the law laid down in Satyawati Sharma v. Union of India (supra). Paragraphs 7 and 8 of the said Judgement are as under:
Delhi High Court Cites 80 - Cited by 2 - S Prasad - Full Document

Ex - 189/19 Jasram Through Lrs vs . Uoi . Pg. 1 Of 25 on 26 February, 2022

2. It is stated that DHs filed the execution petition no. 7/14 - 2262/16 before the Court of Sh. Inderjeet Singh, then ADJ, Saket, New Delhi on similar grounds on which the instant execution petition is filed and the earlier execution petition was dismissed on 20.09.2016 and hence the said execution petition is not maintainable in the eyes of law. The earlier execution petition was filed by 8 DHs through Ex - 189/19 Jasram through LRs Vs. UOI . Pg. 2 of 25 assignees wherein the name of 8th DH is Sh. Mansa Ram. Notices was directed to be issued to DHs on filing of PF, however, PF was not filed, even for notice thus, execution petition was treated to be dismissed for want of prosecution. In the present execution petition, seven DHs alongwith newly added DHs in place of Mansa Ram have alleged that he has assigned his rights under the said award and besides this, there are newly added person posing themselves as DHs and hence the execution petition is not maintainable. It is further averred that Section 146 CPC is being requested to apply but there is a no plea of application u/S. 146 CPC. It is stated that the assignees cannot be decree holders because they have not applied for impleadment of their names in place of assignee. It is admitted case that the Assignment Deed of 14.02.2005 is prior to date of decision of 18.10.2011 and principally Order XXI Rule 16 CPC does not come into picture at all. The LRs of DH no.1 is Davinder Singh but he never appeared in the Reference Court through out in the proceeding but one application under Order XXII R 3 CPC was filed on 07.07.2006, signature appearing on the application and affidavit appearing on the Assignment Deed, prima facie do not tally each other. Hence the application under Order XXII R 16 CPC and Section 146 CPC r/W Sec. 151 CPC is not maintainable and contrary to the judgments of the Apex Court.
Delhi District Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sube Singh (Deceased) Through Lrs vs Uoi & Another on 10 August, 2015

(ii) and (iii) above @ 9% per annum for first year from date of taking possession of the land and @ 17 of 18 S.C. Malik, ADJ­04 SWD Dwarka Courts, New Delhi/ 10.08.2015 LAC no.20/2014 Sube Singh (deceased) through Lrs Vs UOI & Another Village Nangli Sakrawati Award No.13/2008­09/SW 15% per annum for subsequent period till payment of the amount, as per Section ­ 28 of the Act.
Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Munshi (Deceased) Through Lrs vs Uoi & Another on 3 June, 2015

25. Relief In view of the foregoing discussion, the petitioner is held entitled to the following reliefs:­ i. Enhancement in compensation to Rs.36,10,485/­ per acre or say to Rs.7,52,184.37P per Bigha in respect of Block­A land and payment of 16 of 17 S.C. Malik, ADJ­04 SWD Dwarka Courts, New Delhi/ 03.06.2015 LAC no.33/2014 Munshi (deceased) through LRs vs UOI & Another Village Nangli Sakrawati Award No.13/2008­09/SW enhanced compensation accordingly in respect of the land of the petitioner as mentioned in table in para 2 herein above.
Delhi District Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Radhey (Dead) Through Lrs vs . Uoi & Ors. on 5 January, 2016

However, these features have been ignored by the Land Acquisition Collector. The land in question is yielding three to four crops in the year, the petitioner has been having handsome income from land. The petitioner alongwith his family has been rendered unemployed. The market value of land is not less than Rs. 50,000/­ per square yards on the date of notification but Ld. LAC has undervalued it. The Collector failed to take into LAC No. 186/2011 Page 4 of 10 Radhey (dead) through LRs vs. UOI & Ors.
Delhi District Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Kanwar Partap Singh vs Rajbir Pal on 26 August, 2021

3. That even within the limited scope of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in "Satyawati Sharma Vs. Union of India", reported as (2008) 5 SCC 287, an eviction petition relating to commercial / industrial premises on the ground of bonafide requirement under Section 14 (1) (e) of 1958 Act is not maintainable. The scope of the said judgment, without admitting the same to be applicable to the present case, extends the application under Section 14 (1) (e) of 1958 Act only to the residential premises. The scope of the said judgment does not extend to the premises meant for commercial / industrial and let as such.
Delhi District Court Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sh. Ved Prakash (Deceased) Through Lrs vs Union Of India on 8 December, 2014

23. ISSUE NO. 3 : Relief ­ In view of foregoing discussion, LRs of petitioner is held entitled to the following reliefs:­ i. Compensation @ Rs. 21,00,000/­ per acre i.e. an increase of Rs.7,18,000/­ per acre in respect of the land as mentioned in para 7 herein above. ii. Additional amount @ 12% per annum under Section 23(1A) of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 from the date of notification under Section 4 9 of 10 LAC no. 119/14 Ved Prakash (deceased) through LRs v UOI & Another Village Dhool Siras Award No.27/2002­03 of the Act till the date of taking over of possession.
Delhi District Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next