IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Najmi Waziri, J.
Himani Paliwal - Appellant
Versus
Rakesh - Respondent
MAC.APP. 966 of 2019
Decided On : 12-02-2020
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural orders for application disposal (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. tribunal's compliance and verification process (Para 9 , 13 , 16) |
| 3. reliance on itr for determining income (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. expeditious disposal of claims emphasized (Para 14 , 15) |
| 5. conclusion and order for appeal disposal (Para 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT
Najmi Waziri, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 55609/2019
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application stands disposed-off.
CM APPLs. 55610/2019, 55611/2019 (delay)
3. Issue notice.
4. Mr. Pankaj Seth, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the non- applicant.
5. For the reasons mentioned in the applications, the delay is condoned, subject to the applicant planting 30 trees at the `Insaaf Bagh' area of the Central Ridge. The applicant shall appear before the DCF (South) on 25.02.2020 at 11.00 am, who shall indicate to him, the forest lands under his care, where the trees may be planted. The trees shall be of deciduous indigenous variety and they shall have a nursery age of three and a half years and shall have a minimum height of at least six feet. The applicant may water and nurse trees for the next six months. Water will be supplied by the Forest Department, GNCTD. Depending upon the soil type and topography, the DCF may consider the following types of trees for plantation:
(i) Gular (Cluster Fig)
(ii) Kadamba (Burflower Tree)
(iii) Pilkhan (White Fig)
(iv) Jaamun (Black Plum)
(v) Bargad (Banyan Tree)
(vi) Mango
(vii) Amaltas (Golden Shower)
(viii) Mahua (Butter Tree) [Indian Laburnum]
(ix) Putranjiva
(x) Badh
(xi) Sagwan (Teak Wood)
(xii) Safed Siris (Albizia Procera)
(xiii) Kala Siris
(xiv) Anjeer
(xv) Kathal- Jackfruit
(xvi) Palash
(xvii) Arni
(xviii) Bistendu
(xix) Rohida
(xx) Medshingi
(xxi) Palash/Tesu/Dhak
(xxii) Hingot
(xxiii) Ronjh
(xxiv) Khejri
6. Compliance Report alongwith photographs shall be filed both by the applicant and the DCF before the next date.
7. Mr. Gautam Narayan, the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the GNCTD has been called and apprised of this order. He assures the Court of due compliance.
8. In case of default in compliance of the aforesaid order, the case would be liable to be dismissed.
9. List for compliance on 17.03.2020.
MAC.APP. 966/2019
10. This appeal impugns the order dated 12.04.2018 passed by the learned MACT in MACT Case No. 56355/16 on the ground that the ITR for AY 2013-14 of the deceased just prior to his demise, which shows his gross income as Rs.2,94,991/-, was disregarded only on the ground that the same was not proven through the office of the Income Tax Officer.
11. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the dicta of the Supreme Court in Malarvizhi & Ors. v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr., 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1579 which has held, inter alia:
"... the income tax return is a statutory document on which reliance is placed to determine annual income of the deceased....".
12. Apropos the issue of relying upon ITRs for the calculation of loss of dependency, this Court in Royal Sundaram General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Kamlesh Devi & Ors., MAC APP. 17/2019, decided on 06.09.2019, has held as under:
"6. What emanates from the above is that the ITR for Assessment Year 2015-16 was taken into consideration although the deceased passed away in the Assessment Year 2017-18. In effect, the considered ITR related to approximately 15 months prior to his demise. The deceased was within his statutory rights to file ITRs for Assessment Years 2016-17 and 2017-18, which were filed after the 2015- 2016 ITR's, but because of his demise, his claimants had filed the said ITR's.
7. The ITRs for the subsequent years show a quantum jump of approximately 20% from the previous years which were filed by the claimants, whereas for the preceding year, the increase was merely under 10%. The ITRs of the deceased filed on record show his increase in earnings as under:
| Assessment Year | Absolute Income (in Rs.) | Year on Y | |
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.