.....named in the fir have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned sessions court; (f). that he is willing to furnish sound surety to the satisfaction of this court, if anticipatory is granted to him; (g). that he is ready to abide by the terms, conditions, if any, imposed by this court while granting anticipatory bail; (h). that the petitioner is a permanent resident of delhi and has deep roots in society; (i). that there are no chances of his fleeing from justice; (j). that he has clean antecedents and no case has been registered against him; and (k). that he has already appeared before the sit and has already joined the investigation; and that his anticipatory bail seeking grant of anticipatory bail filed before the learned additional sessions court-04 (shahdara), karkardooma, delhi was rejected on an erroneous premise observing to the effect that the case of the applicant was distinguishable from others granted bail in as much as the charge-sheet had been filed against them submitting to the effect that the charge-sheet was also filed against the present applicant. status report of sit2 the status report of the state on record indicates that the fir in bail appln......
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....of tenders.6. the above controversy arises on account of conflicting clauses in documents constituting the contract between the parties. brief facts 7. the petitioner issued a notice inviting tender (nit) on 06.03.2013 for “comprehensive development of corridor (outer ring road) between wazirabad to mukarba chowk” (hereafter „the project‟). the length of the aforesaid corridor is about 7.6 kms and the project involved civil and electrical works with respect to the said stretch. the cumulative estimated cost of the project was ₹500,54,21,665/- [₹495,34,28,156/- (for civil works) + ₹5,19,93,509/- (for electrical works)]. and the project was to be completed within a period of 24 months.8. pursuant to the aforesaid nit, the respondent submitted its bid for ₹442,95,68,517/- which was below the estimated cost. the said bid was accepted and, on 29.04.2013, the petitioner issued a letter of acceptance (loa) stipulating the date of commencement of work as 21.05.2013. the project was to be completed within 24 months and, o.m.p. (comm) 143/2018 page 3 of 21 therefore, the stipulated date of completion of the project was fixed as 20.05.2015.9. thereafter, the parties.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....of the arbitration act, 1940 for filing the award dated 27.2.2009 and making it a rule of court. this application is pending since 2009. the brief facts of the case are as follows : (a) the petitioner has been carrying on business of publicity and advertisements. the respondent no.1 is a government of india enterprise and is a company under the indian companies act, 1956; (b) that a contract dated 02.02.1993 came into existence between the petitioner and the respondent no.1 on the petitioner accepting the terms and conditions which were received along with the letter dated 27.01.1993 of the respondent no.1, placing the cs(comm) 136/2017 page 1 of 14 + petitioner on its panel as approved publicity agent; (c) that under the said contract, the respondent no.1 awarded and assigned various works of advertising to the petitioner which were duly executed by the petitioner to the entire satisfaction of the respondent no.1; (d) that as the petitioner did not receive payment of its certain bills for display of 'kiosks' (display of advertisement boards on electric poles). the petitioner sent a notice dated 10.02.1994 demanding payment of the amounts due from the respondent no.1 to the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....protection on 19.05.2017.... petitioners in bail application no.979/2017 were granted interim protection on 25.05.2017 and... petitioners in bail application no.982/2017 were granted interim protection on 25.05.2017.7. the investigating officer submits that the petitioners joined investigation, as and when were called upon to do so.8. since the parties have settled their disputes and petitioners have complied with the orders granting interim protection, i am of the view that the petitioners have made out the case for grant of anticipatory bail.9. in the event of arrest, the arresting officer shall release the petitioners on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of rs.25,000/- by each of the petitioners.10. the petitions are disposed of in the above terms.11. order dasti under signatures of the court master. sanjeev sachdeva, j april10 2018 ‘sn’ bail appln. 871/2017,942/2017, 979/2017 & 982/2017 page 3
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....that a worker is not entitled to regularization merely because he has worked for the requisite period when no posts are available. however, in the facts and circumstances of this case, respondents-workmen are entitled to objective reconsideration of their case for re-absorption. while sustaining the impugned award, petitioner-bank is directed to ensure that the case of respondents-workmen is reconsidered afresh for absorption as and when the vacancy occurs and the needful be done strictly in terms of the w.p. (c) 7237/2007 & other connected matters page 12 of 13 bipartite settlements of 1988 and 1991. it is expected that it will be so done within a period of 12 weeks or so from today.22. so far as the relief claimed in w.p. (c) 8739/2009 regarding backwages and continuity of service is concerned, this court finds that in view of there being no vacancy as of now, the relief sought in this petition cannot be granted. however, in the event of respondents- workmen, including petitioners in w.p. (c) 8739/2009, being absorbed on reconsideration of their cases within the afore-stipulated period, the claim of writ petitioners in w.p. (c) 8739/2009 be also considered by petitioner-bank.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....2018, which reveals that the cut-off of final merit list for the post in question was 71.50 marks and petitioner had secured 134 marks.... petitioner further claims that she had made a representation (annexure p-7) to the general manager (hr) of respondent-bank stationed in mumbai on 13th march, 2018, but to no avail. w.p.(c) 3512/2018 page 1 of 2 2. in the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition with direction to respondent to effectively consider petitioner’s representation (annexure p-7) by passing a speaking order thereon, within a period of four weeks from today and its fate be conveyed to petitioner within a week thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedies as available in law, if need be.3. with aforesaid directions, this petition and the applications are disposed of. copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties. (sunil gaur) judge april10 2018 s w.p.(c) 3512/2018 page 2 of 2
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT$~5 to 7 * in the high court of delhi at new delhi % date of decision:10. 04.2018 + ita8122017 oriflame india private limited ..... appellant versus assistant commissioner of income tax ..... respondent + ita8132017 oriflame india private limited ..... appellant versus deputy commissioner of income tax..... respondent + ita8252017 oriflame india private limited ..... appellant versus additional commissioner of income tax, ..... respondent present: mr.himanshu sinha and mr. bhuwan dhoopar, advocates for petitioner. mr.deepak anand, jr.standing counsel for revenue. coram: hon'ble mr. justice s. ravindra bhat ita8122017 & connected appeals page 1 of 2 hon'ble mr. justice a.k. chawla mr. justice s. ravindra bhat (open court) % 1. the appeals are allowed.2. for reasons, the judgment dated 10.4.2018 in ita8112017 may be referred to. april10 2018 ndn s. ravindra bhat, j a. k. chawla, j ita8122017 & connected appeals page 2 of 2
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....as a tenant by the appellant only i.e. the petitioner before this court.7. though the matter would require inquiry and trial on the issues of facts, it being the burden of the petitioner to prove in accordance with law the rent deed and the counter-foils of the rent receipts as indeed the other documents giving rise to the cause of action for filing a case of this nature, the respondent - concededly a tenant - cannot be permitted to continue enjoying the premises without making any payment. cm(m )1236/2017 page 3 of 4 8. in the above facts and circumstances, it would be just and proper to direct an order for deposit of the rent under section 15 (2) of the delhi rent control act, 1958 rather than the payment directly to the petitioner.9. thus, the impugned orders of the additional rent controller and the rent controller tribunal are set aside. it is directed that the respondent will deposit with the additional rent controller the arrears of the rent at the rate of rs.330/- per month with effect from 01.01.2008 (the eviction petition was filed on 13.01.2011) upto date within 30 days hereof and thereafter continue to make deposit of the rent at the said rate month by month by.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....was let of by si naresh kumar who had received order of hon'ble high court which was communicated to him around 04:30 p.m. on his whatsapp. the factum of complainant facing 15 criminal cases is also admitted by the io in which investigations are going on. it is also seen that as per submissions made before hon'ble high court of delhi by sh. rahul mehra, learned standing counsel that round the clock security has been provided to the complainant.19. considering the fact that prima-facie, there cannot be a case of abduction when a police officer has gone rightly or wrongly for execution of nbws, considering that bail is rule and jail is exception and considering that there is no incriminating evidence against the accused regarding the incident of firing as per the investigation conducted by the ios as per status report and considering the fact that accused is in jc for last 35 days and is not required for further custodial interrogation and considering that there is evidence with respect to the electronic gadgets i.e. cdrs and cctv footages which are yet to be analyzed and same are not in possession of the accused, ………” crl.m.c. 1692/2018 page 3 of 6 6. perusal of.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....that a worker is not entitled to regularization merely because he has worked for the requisite period when no posts are available. however, in the facts and circumstances of this case, respondents-workmen are entitled to objective reconsideration of their case for re-absorption. while sustaining the impugned award, petitioner-bank is directed to ensure that the case of respondents-workmen is reconsidered afresh for absorption as and when the vacancy occurs and the needful be done strictly in terms of the w.p. (c) 7237/2007 & other connected matters page 12 of 13 bipartite settlements of 1988 and 1991. it is expected that it will be so done within a period of 12 weeks or so from today.22. so far as the relief claimed in w.p. (c) 8739/2009 regarding backwages and continuity of service is concerned, this court finds that in view of there being no vacancy as of now, the relief sought in this petition cannot be granted. however, in the event of respondents- workmen, including petitioners in w.p. (c) 8739/2009, being absorbed on reconsideration of their cases within the afore-stipulated period, the claim of writ petitioners in w.p. (c) 8739/2009 be also considered by petitioner-bank.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT