Delhi Court January 2009 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Harpal Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2009
Reported in: (2009)IILLJ475Del
Mool Chand Garg, J.1. Brief facts giving rise to the filing of this L.P.A. are: (i) That the respondent workman was employed with the appellant as a Security Guard. On June 5, 1991 while returning to his house after discharging his duties, he met with an accident and sustained grievous injuries rendering him unsuitable for employment as security guard, thereafter he proceeded on medical leave. He was referred to DTC medical board where he refused to appear. He was prematurely retired from service w.e.f. February 22, 1994 vide letter dated May 18, 1994. The respondent aggrieved by the aforesaid order raised a Industrial Dispute before the Conciliation Officer, Delhi Administration for issuing directions to the Management for reinstating him in service. Govt. of NCT of Delhi referred the dispute between the respondent and the appellant to the Labor Court registered as I.D. No. 118/1996; (ii) The same was adjudicated upon by the Presiding Officer, Labor Court VII. Vide order dated Februar...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Shri Dharam Pal (Ex. Driver)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2009
Reported in: 160(2009)DLT555
Mool Chand Garg, J.1. This Judgment shall dispose of all the aforesaid matters which raises the following Common questions for our consideration:i) Whether Section 47 of the 'Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Disabilities Act). also mandates that the drivers (hereinafter referred to as 'workmen/drivers.) working in Delhi Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the management.) be retained in service till the age of sixty years even after they reached the age of their superannuation which is 55 years as provided for vide Regulation 10 of DRTA(Conditions for Appointment of Service) Regulations 1952, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations.) and were not found fit to by a medical board to act as a driver after that age. ii) Whether office order No. 99 dated 04.10.1963 and the circular dated 30.6.98, issued by the management by virtue of Section 4(e) of Delhi Road Transport ...
Ramesh Chand Dang Vs. B.S.E.S. Rajdhani Power Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2009
Reported in: 2009LC(DEL)314
Vipin Sanghi, J.1. The issue that arises for consideration in this petition is whether the respondent licencee is justified in clubbing the electric load pertaining to the Package A.C. plant, which as per the inspection report prepared by the respondent was connected to the DG Set (Diesel Generator set) in the premises of the petitioner, and thereby levy a higher rate of tariff applicable to MLHT connections.2. The petitioner is owner of premises No. C-7, Ring Road, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi and is running an eating house under the name and style of M/s Seven Seas.3. The inspecting team of the respondent conducted an inspection in the premises of the petitioner on 28.04.2004 It was noted by the inspection team that the connected load was 83.948 KW and load of the Package AC Plant was found to be 22.50 x 6 KW, 135 KW. In the Inspection Report it was noted:22.500 W x 6 Package AC unit was found installed but the same found operating by DG Set although the change over switch of the genera...
Ayodhya Devi Vs. Dda and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2009
Reported in: 156(2009)DLT346
Vipin Sanghi, J.1. By this order I proceed to dispose of the preliminary objection raised by the respondent DDA to the maintainability of the present writ petition on the ground that the petitioners are guilty of approaching the Court with unclean hand, resorting to suppression, concealment and misstatement of material facts and abusing the process of the Court. It is also argued that the jurisdiction being exercised by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution being discretionary, on account of the aforesaid conduct of the petitioners, this Court should refuse to exercise its said jurisdiction in the matter and dismiss the writ petition without even going into the merits of the case.2. The present writ petition has been preferred by 28 individuals against the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), respondent No. 1 and Kangra Adarsh Cooperative Group Housing Society (respondent No. 2) primarily praying for the reliefs that the respondent No. 1 i.e. DDA should issue show cause notice...
Sudha Garg Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2009
Reported in: 156(2009)DLT498
Sanjiv Khanna, J.1. The plaintiff, Smt. Sudha Garg, alleges medical negligence and seeks recovery of damages of Rs. 53,41,723/- from Union of India, Chief of Army Staff, Adjutant General, Directorate General of Medical Services (Army) and Army Hospital (Referral and Research), defendant Nos. 1 to 5, respectively (hereinafter collectively referred to as defendants, for short) and two doctors Lieutenant Colonel A.K. Nagpal and Lieutenant Colonel V.K. Shukul (hereinafter referred to as defendant Nos. 6 and 7 respectively). Admitted facts2. The plaintiff is wife of Brigadier M.L. Garg (Retd.) and on 14th October, 1999 had visited Gastroenterology Department of the defendant No. 5 hospital, at Delhi. She was examined by defendant No. 6, Gastroenterologist and diagnosed as an old case of severe gastritis with history of heart burn. OPD card/ case history Exh.PW1/2 dated 14th Oct.,1999, an admitted document, records that the plaintiff did not complain of pain in abdomen and dysphagia (difficu...
Ministry of Sound International Ltd. Vs. Indus Renaissance Partners En ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2009
Reported in: 156(2009)DLT406
Sanjiv Khanna, J.1. Indus Renaissance Partners Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. and Mr. Anshuman Kapur, defendants 1 and 2 have filed an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as Act, for short) for disposal/dismissal of the Suit filed by Ministry of Sound International Ltd, the plaintiff herein on the ground that the disputes are covered by the arbitration clause between the parties. The plaintiff, as per the plaint, is a private company incorporated under the laws of Ireland.2. The plaintiff and the defendant No. 1 admit execution of the Agreement dated 7th December, 2006 granting licence to defendant No. 1 to use its trademarks/copyright in respect of 'Ministry of Sound', 'The Ministry', 'Ministry', 'MOS' and logo of the plaintiff and to run a night club by the name of 'The Pyramid'.3. Agreement dated 7th December, 2006 incorporates Clause 29 under the heading Governing law, Jurisdiction and Dispute Resolution. The said Clause reads...
Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare Limited and Horlicks Limited and a ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2009
Reported in: 156(2009)DLT330
Sanjiv Khanna, J.1. Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Health Care Limited is the sole plaintiff in CS(OS) No. 2577/2008 and plaintiffs No. 2 in CS(OS) No. 2646/2008. Horlicks Limited, United Kingdom, is plaintiff No. 1 in CS(OS) No. 2646/2008. Both suits have filed against M/s Heinz India (P) Limited alleging disparaging advertisements by the defendant, manufacturers of drink/milk mix 'Complan'. The plaintiff(s) are manufacturing the drink/milk mix under the mark 'Horlicks'. CS(OS) No. 2577/2008 deals with print advertisements and CS(OS) No. 2646/2008 deals with moving/video advertisements.2. The defendant had entered appearance on 12th December, 2008 when CS (OS) No. 2577/2008 was listed for the first time and were on caveat in CS(OS) No. 2646/2008. The defendant has also filed reply along with documents to I.A. No. 15237/2008 in CS(OS) No. 2577/2008.3. Jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the present suits as a part of cause of action arises in Delhi, is not disputed. The defendant, howev...
Vinod Kumar Garg Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ3224; 156(2009)DLT603
ORDER Whereas it is alleged that Sh. Vinod Kumar Garg while functioning as Inspector, DESU (now DVB) office Seelampur, Delhi, a public servant in the discharge of his official duty demanded Rs. 2000/- as illegal gratification from Sh. Nand Lal S/o Shri Megh Raj r/o H. No. 341/20, Mangal Sain Building, Bagh Kare Khan, Delhi-110007 in consideration for installing an electric meter at shop No. A-2, DSIDC Welcome Colony, Seelampur, Delhi, without proper formalities. Sh. Vinod Kumar Gard, Inspector, DESU (now DVB) office Seelampur, delhi, demanded, accepted and obtained Rs. 500/- (second instalment) as illegal gratification from the complainant. Whereas the said act of Inspector, Shr. Vinod Kumar Gard DESU (now DVB), Seelampur Office, Delhi constitute an offence punishable under Section 7/13 POC Act No. 49 of 1988. Whereas I, Navin Chawla, Chairman, DVB, New Delhi being the authority competent to remove Sh. Vinod Kumar Garg DVB office Seelampur, Delhi from office/services after fully and ca...
Yashpal Singh Vs. Bhagwana and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2009
Reported in: 156(2009)DLT513
Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. This revision petition has been preferred against an order dated 3.2.1987 of Senior Sub Judge, Delhi whereby he allowed an appeal against an order dated 8.9.1986 of learned Executing Court dismissing an execution application observing that the decree could not be executed.2. Brief facts necessary for disposal of the revision petition are that the three brothers i.e. Shri Bhagwana, Shri Rattan and Shri Hira were joint bhumidars and co-owners of 90 bigha and 12 biswa of land situated in the revenue estate of village Tikri Kalan, Delhi. Shri Hira sold his 1/3rd undivided share in the joint holding to S/Shri Yashpal Singh, Dharampal Singh and Mahipal Singh vide a registered sale deed in their favour. Mutation with respect this 1/3rd share sold by Shri Hira in favour of vendees was sanctioned on 21.7.1973.3. On 19.12.1973, the other two brothers of Shri Hira viz. Shri Bhagwana and Shri Rattan filed a suit for permanent injunction with a prayer that since they were...
Jetlite (India) Ltd. Vs. Capt. R. Khosla
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2009
Reported in: 157(2009)DLT677
Kailash Gambhir, J.1. This order shall dispose of two separate writ petitions one filed by Jetlite (India) Ltd. in WP (C) No. 9066/2007 seeking writ of certiorari or any other writ to quash the Award dated 30th August, 2007 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court and the writ petition filed by Captain R. Khosla in CWP 8284/2004 seeking modification of the said order dated 30th August, 2007 seeking interest @ 18% per annum w.e.f. 16.7.1998 till the time of full and final payment on the claimed amount of Rs. 4,38,799/-.2. Brief facts in nutshell as per WP(C) No. 9066/2007, relevant for deciding the present petitions are as under:That the respondent Captain R. Khosla was appointed as Pilot in the Sahara Airlines on 1.11.1994. The job of the Pilot in an Airline is one of control and it requires initiative and creativeness and faculty of mind. It is managerial and supervisory in nature. The respondent was getting a very handsome salar...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »