AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Towards notice period","1,77,684/-
Severance Pay,"6,39,387/-
Gratuity,"3,81,209/-
4- Paid Towards back wages pursuant to execution,"8,00,000/-
Paid towards interim Award,"33,19,096/-
Paid in compliance of Section 17-B,"54,56,360/-
Total,"1,07,73,736/-â€
HEADS,"A M O U N T( IN
RS.)
Towards Notice Period,"1,77,684/-
Severance Pay,"6,39,387/-
Gratuity,"3,81,209/-
B a c k Wages pursuant to
Execution","8,00,000/-
Towards Interim Award,"33,19,096/-
Payments made under S. 17B.,"54,56,360/-
TOTAL,"1,07,73,736/-
The Appellant has claimed an amount of Rs. 69.9 lakhs.,
The Appellant has already received almost double the amount claimed by her.,
In light of the discussions above, the aforesaid amounts received by her may be treated as a final settlement of all her claims. The impugned",
Judgment of the Division Bench dated 14.07.2017, is modified to this extent.",
Thereafter, the applicant filed Misc. Application No. 845-846/2019 for modification/direction in judgment dated 03.12.2018 passed in Civil Appeal",
No. 11766-11767/2018. The said application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 01.07.2019.,
In the present application, the applicant submits that vide order dated 03.07.2013 passed in CM No.7730/2011 this Court has been pleased to pass",
the following order pending sine die:-,
“…During the pendency of the writ petition respondent no.2 had moved CM No.7730/2011 for directing the petitioner bank to deposit in this Court,
a sum of 19,20,802.60 and then to release the title documents of her property lying deposited in this Court to her. The record of the writ petition was",
then requisitioned when respondent no.2 had mentioned the matter regarding non-disposal of the present application. In my view, the present",
application has to be disposed of when the writ petition itself is also finally disposed of which stage has still not reached and that is evident even from a,
reading of the order of the Division Bench, relevant portions whereof have already been reproduced. Though this could have been said even at the",
time of passing of the order dated 22nd March, 2013 but that having not been said at that time it is being ordered today that CM No.7730/2011 shall be",
disposed of along with the main writ petition.""",
Vide the present application, the applicant seeks direction thereby to direct the petitioner to release excess amount as recorded vide order dated",
l5.12.2006 and 03.07.2013 and further seeks direction thereby to direct the Registrar General of this court to release pending amount of Rs.3,00,394/-",
against the recovery certificate in favour of the applicant.,
The fact remains that the dispute and the issues raised in the present application, have been dealt by the detailed judgment dated 12.04.2017 in",
W.P.(C) 11344/2019. Thereafter, the LPA was filed by the applicant which was dismissed vide order dated 14.07.2017. Thereafter, in SLP the",
applicant challenged the same before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the same was converted as Civil Appeal No. 11766-11767/2018 which was,
also dismissed vide judgment dated 03.12.2018. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Misc. Application nos. 845-846/2019 for modification/direction, the",
same was dismissed as withdrawn by the applicant vide order dated 01.07.2019.,
Despite the aforesaid facts, the applicant moved the present application. Therefore, I am of the considered view that this is sheer misuse of judicial",
process and wastage of public time and precious time of this Court. The applicant is present in person and I have been hearing this matter for the past,
one hour, therefore while dismissing this application, I hereby impose cost of Rs. 50,000/- to be deposited in favour of Delhi High Court Legal Services",
Committee within two weeks from today, failing which the Registrar General of this court is directed to recover the same from the applicant as per",
law.,
Since, there is no direction even from the Single Judge upto the Supreme Court to release excess amount as claimed by the applicant. Moreover,",
counsel for the bank has submitted that some loan is still due against applicant and which shall be determined as earliest and the action to that effect,
would be taken very soon by the bank.,
In view of above, the application is dismissed.",