Delhi Court July 2010 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.
Mcd Vs Chander Prakash Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-30-2010
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to Reporter or not?3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?ORDER. 1. The aforesaid writ petitions are being disposed of by a common order for the reason same question of law arises for consideration in all.2. Unfortunately counsel does not appear for the respondent in WP(C)No.3368/2010, but we note that on the last date of hearing i.e. on 20.7.2010 it was agreed that WP(C)No.3368/2010 shall be dispose of today.3. The respondents in all the three writ petitions have succeeded before the Tribunal and have obtained directions in their favour that their respective employer would reimburse, in full, the medical expenses incurred by the respondents pertaining to medical aid received by them at various hospitals.4. Allowing the claim of Chander Prakash Gupta the respondent of WP(C)No.3368/2010, the Tribunal has relied upon the decision reported as Promlesh Bhatnagar v. ESIC 129(2006)...
Ram Nandan Vs State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-30-2010
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment Yes2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest? YesORDER.1. The appellants were acquitted by us vide a separate order dated 28.7.2010. While acquitting them, we stated that the reasons for our decision would follow. We, accordingly, are recording reasons for their acquittal.2. These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 19.1.2010, and Order on Sentence dated 27.1.2010, whereby the appellants were convicted under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 thereof and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs 2,000/- each or to undergo SI for six months each in default.3. On 30th April, 2006, at about 3.55 pm., Bhola Chaudhary, brother of deceased Anita, informed Police Control Room that someone had cut the throat of his sister (wrongly recorded as aunt) in House No.304, Gali No.1, Durga Park, Nasir Pur. On receipt of this informati...
Arvind Kejriwal Vs Central Public Information Officer.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-30-2010
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest? Yes 1. A short but interesting question arises for determination in these petitions arising out of an order dated 12th June 2008, passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC). That question is whether the information seeker Mr. Arvind Kejriwal can be provided with copies of documents in the files concerning appointments at the levels of Deputy Secretary, Director, Joint Secretary, Additional Secretary and Secretary in the Government of India without the procedure outlined in Section 11(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) having to be followed?2. The CIC allowed Mr. Kejriwal inspection of the relevant files concerning empanelment of Additional Secretaries and Secretaries to the Government of India and he was to be provided by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Government of India ...
Arun Kumar Nigam Vs Dig. Genl. Central Industry Security Fores and ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-30-2010
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? YesORDER1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 28th July, 1989 passed by the Commandant of the CISF Force Unit-respondent no. 2 herein imposing the punishment of the removal from service; order dated 16th November, 1989 passed by the respondent no. 1 dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner against the same as well as the order dated 26th/27th April, 1990 dismissing the representation filed by the petitioner. The petitioner has also sought a declaration that the disciplinary proceedings held against him at the instance of respondent nos. 3 and 4 under the Delhi Police (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1980 are wholly illegal, invalid, incompetent and that no disciplinary action could be taken by his employer, the Central Industrial Security Force (`CISF' hereafter) ...
Darshan Kumar Vs State and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-30-2010
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to the reporter or not?3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner for setting aside order dated 16th January, 2009 passed by the court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate and to quash the proceedings initiated therein under F.I.R. No.290 of 2002 registered under Section 420 IPC at Police Station Okhla Industrial Area. The order dated 16th January, 2009 shows that after receiving charge sheet in case F.I.R. No.290 of 2002, the court took cognizance of the offence and directed for summoning the accused through Investigating Officer for 20th July, 2009. Quashing is sought on the ground that the F.I.R. and the proceedings initiated there under was a gross misuse of the criminal justice system and learned trial court committed an error in law in not summoning the offending company named in the F.I.R. and issuing process against the directors. It is...
M/S Mitsubishi Corporation India Pvt Ltd. Vs the Value Added Tax Offic ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-30-2010
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment YES2. To be referred to the Reporter or not YES3. Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest YES ORDER.1. The petitioner has prayed for, inter alia, the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the notices of default payment of taxes and default assessment of penalties for the financial year 2007-08 (April 2007 to March 2008). The said notices and default assessment of penalties have been annexed as Annexures B (Collectively) and C (Collectively) alongwith the writ petition. The petitioner has also prayed for the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the Additional Commissioners order dated 09.10.2009 which confirmed the Value Added Tax Officers order with regard to default assessment of taxes.2. Initially, when the writ petition was filed, the second prayer was not sought because that stage had not been reached. The petitioner ...
Charanjit Thukral and anr. Vs Deepak Thukral and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
(1) Whether reporters of local paper may be allowed to see the judgment?(2) To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes (3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes1. Vide this order I shall dispose of the abovesaid three applications. Two of the applications have been filed by the Plaintiffs seeking ad interim injunction against the Defendants and also modification of ex-parte ad interim injunction granted by this court vide order dated 17.05.2010. Third application has been filed by the Defendants seeking vacation of the said ex-parte ad-interim injunction.2. Plaintiff No.1 happen to be father of the Defendants whereas Plaintiff No.2 is their step-mother. Plaintiff is running his business of hardware as Proprietor of M/s. Gangu Ram Ram Kishan at 5229, Shradhanand Marg, G.B. road, Ajmeri Gate, Delhi for the last about 35-40 years. Plaintiffs and Defendant No.2 are residing in House No.H-32, Kailash Colony, New Delhi whereas Defendant No.1 residing in N-152, First Floo...
Varun Malik Vs Payal Malik
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.2. To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes.3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest? Yes. 1.These petitions arise out of order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 7th May, 2010 while disposing of two appeals against the order dated 27th July, 2009 passed by the learned MM.2. The undisputed facts are that Ms. Payal Malik used to live with her parents before marriage at Hissar. Her marriage took place with Mr. Nagesh Malik whose parents used to live at Panipat. Marriage of the parties was solemnized at Panipat on 30th August, 2001. Nagesh Malik was already working in USA and after marriage both of them went to USA on 20th September, 2001 where they settled their matrimonial home and lived together. On 24th October, 2002 a female child was born to the couple at USA, who was named as Vanishka. The parties continued living together in USA till 2008. It seems deep differences arose between ...
Harish Kumar Vs State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.2. To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes.3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest? Yes.1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of F.I.R. No.314 of 2006 registered at Police Station Bhajanpura against the petitioner under Sections 376/493 IPC. The allegations made by the prosecutrix in her complaint to the police are as under :-"Opposite to our house in Bhajanpura, there was house of Sh. Ramdhan and I and my family used to visit house of Sh. Ramdhan as a neighbourer. Accused Harish also used to visit house of Sh. Ramdhan since he was a cousin of Sh. Ramdhan. Harish started expressing his love for me but I did not give positive response. However, after sometime, I fell in love with Harish and Harish started assuring me that he would marry me. About four years back (from the date of filing complaint), Harish was alone at Sh. Ramdhan's house and ...
Aggarwal Structural Consultants Pvt Ltd and ors.Vs Public Works Depart ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No3. Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest? No 1. The Petitioner company was awarded the contract for preparation of structural design including preparation of 8 sets of structural drawings as well as preparation of service drawings (civil works including water supply, sanitary and drainage) for the proposed Police Housing Complex at Mandoli, Delhi for a sum of Rs. 26,48,000. A separate bid of the Petitioner for the sum of Rs. 4.5 lakhs for the consultancy work for obtaining Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) clearance, was also accepted by the competent authority. The Petitioner submitted the bid for preparation of the structural drawings on 12th August 2006. After negotiations it agreed to a reduced lump sum fee of Rs. 23.5 lakhs plus service taxes by its letter dated 9 th September 2006. The acceptance of the bid ended in the execution of the contract o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »