Delhi Court September 2010 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2010 Page 10 of about 113 results (0.019 seconds)Santhosh Kumar MennA.Vs. Gnct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
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? ORDER1. On 12.10.2007, the Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board (DSSSB), acting on behalf of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi issued a public notice inviting applications from eligible candidates for the post of Teacher (Primary). As per the advertisement, the last date of for applying i.e. submitting the application was 29.10.2007. As per the advertisement, the applicable educational qualification to be eligible was:-(i) Senior Secondary (10+2) or intermediate or its equivalent with 50% marks from a recognized Board.(ii) Two Years Diploma/Certificate course in ETE/JBT or B.EI.Ed from a recognized institution.(iii) Must have passed Hindi as a subject as secondary level.2. Needless to state, vide serial No. (ii) of the three condition for eligibility was the candidate possessing either a two year Diploma or a Ce...
Tag this Judgment!Raghu Thakur.Vs. Govt. of Nct and anr.
Court: Delhi
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?ORDER 1. B y this petition the petitioner has assailed an order dated 16th October, 2008, passed by learned ASJ and order dated 21st November, 2007, passed by learned M.M. dismissing the complaint of the petitioner under Section 499/500 of IPC against the respondent on the ground that no sanction under Section 197 Crl. P.C. was there.2. it is submitted by the petitioner that the respondent P.K. Samadhiya was Divisional Railway Manager with North Central Railway and "Railways" Crl. M.C. No. 806 of 2009 Page 1 of 3 was not 'State' within the provisions of Cr. P.C. and therefore no sanction under Section 197 Cr. P.C. was necessary.3. The defamation proceedings are sought to be initiated against the respondent P.K. Samadhiya because he wrote following letter to the petitioner:" Shri Raghu Thakur 27-A, D.D.A. Flats Mata Sundri Road...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Tyagi. Vs State.
Court: Delhi
ORDER1. This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by Sanjay Tyagi. It is stated that Sanjay Tyagi was only a dummy director in M/s.Nanda Tourism Corporation Limited which is actually owned and promoted by R.K. Nanda and his wife Promila Nanda and his family members. It is stated that Sanjay Tyagi was an employee and was made Managing Director of M/s. Nanda Tourism Corporation Limited on 30th June, 2005 at the behest of the Nandas who had filed Form No.32 to the said effect. It is pointed out that Sanjay Tyagi is not concerned with M/s. Durga Builders Private Limited and is not an accused in the charge sheet filed by the police in the case of M/s. Durga Builders Private Limited.2. One Manjit Kaur had filed Co.P.No. 234 of 2005 for winding up of M/s. Nanda Tourism Corporation Limited and Co.P.No. 238 of 2005 for winding up of M/s. Durga Builders Private Limited. In Co.P.No. 238 of 2005 a detailed order dated 3rd October, 2008 was passed holding interalia that the petition for...
Tag this Judgment!Nidhi Mahajan.Vs State and ors.
Court: Delhi
ORDER1. Mr. Rajat Wadhwa, Advocate has shown me the original courier receipt. Photocopy of the said courier receipt will be placed on record. The original receipt is returned to Mr. Rajat Wadhwa, Advocate.2. I have heard the counsel for the parties. A limited issue arises for consideration and, therefore, the matter is taken up for final disposal. There is also urgency in the matter.3. The petitioner is the sister-in-law of the complainant Ms. Chetna Durga Mahajan, who has filed a complaint under Section 498-A/406/34 IPC, which has resulted in registration of FIR No. 185/2010, Police Station Moti Nagar, Delhi.4. The petitioner is 27 years old and has received scholarship to study in France in French Language for the academic year 2010-11. The petitioner has placed relevant papers on record. Her course will be ending in the month of June, 2011. The FIR was registered only on 18 th June, 2010 and is still pending investigation. Parties are also trying to resolve and settle their differen...
Tag this Judgment!Yash Pal. Vs Secretary, Public Enterprises Selection Board and ors.
Court: Delhi
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? YesORDER1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the constitutional validity of the Recruitment Rules of respondent No.1-Public Enterprises Select in Board (hereinafter referred to as "PESB") prescribing different upper age limits, namely, 57 years for external candidates and 58 years for internal candidates for Board level posts.2. The relevant facts of the present case are that on 25th January, 2010, respondent No.1-PESB issued a circular/advertisement seeking candidates for the post of Member (Operations) in Airports Authority. The said circular/advertisement stated as under:- "Subject : Selection for the post of Member (Operations), Airports Authority of India Limited (AAI) in Schedule B Scale of pay. The Public Enterprises Selection Board (P...
Tag this Judgment!J.K. Sawhney.Vs. Punjab National Bank.
Court: Delhi
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes ORDER1. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 19th April, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.6744/2007 whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant.2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant was an employee of the respondent-Bank and he retired from services on 05th February, LPA No. 437of 2010 Page 1 of 5 2006. After his retirement, he developed acute heart problem and incurred expenses of Rs.3,14,487/- on his treatment at Escorts Heart Institute. The appellant requested for reimbursement of medical expenses from the respondent-Bank which was declined on the ground that there was no such scheme for reimbursement of medical expenses to the retired employees of the respondent-Bank....
Tag this Judgment!Jet Lite India Ltd.Vs. Indus Airways Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
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?ORDER1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing the complaint filed by the respondent for offences under Section 120A, 406,420 and 34 IPC and for quashing order dated 30th April 2009 passed in the complaint issuing summons to the petitioner for the offence under Section 406 IPC.2. Brief facts relevant for purpose of deciding this petition are that the petitioner had a contract with Indus Airways Pvt. Ltd. and under this contract, the petitioner had taken from the respondent on loaning basis two Cargo Fire Bottle, Part No.34600037-I and 3650018-3 and the petitioner was liable to pay the rent /user charges @ 1% per day of actual cost of component upto one month and thereafter @ 1.5% per day. According to respondent, petitioner stopped paying the loaning amount and in January 2007 ...
Tag this Judgment!JaIn Happy School,vs. Urmila JaIn W/O Sh. Raj Kumar Jain,and anr.
Court: Delhi
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes2. To be referred to Reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes ORDER1. Present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, vide which petitioner has challenged order dated 22nd February, 2010 passed by Presiding Officer, Delhi School Tribunal (for short as Tribunal) allowing application of respondent no. 1, for impleadment of Sh. Prem Kumar Jain and Sh. V.P. Jain as respondents, in this case.2. Brief facts of this case are that, respondent no. 1 (Appellant before Tribunal) joined petitioners school in 1991 as Primary Teacher. Thereafter, she was promoted to higher posts from time to time and was officiating as Vice- Principal. In 2009, she was reverted back to her original position of TGT.3. Respondent no. 1 challenged the order of her reversion before the Tribunal. In appeal, petitioner filed its written statement.4. During the course of a...
Tag this Judgment!Vijay Goel.and anr.Vs. State Through Cbi,
Court: Delhi
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?ORDER1. By these two petitions, the petitioners have assailed orders dated 7th February, 2009, passed by the learned ACMM and dated 8th May, 2009, passed by learned ASJ and prayed that both the orders be quashed. 2. Both the petitioners were facing trial in case FIR No. RC/SIB/2002/E/ 0002/SIU-IX, registered by the CBI on 4th March, 2002 on the complaints made by Ms Joelie Clark and Ms Joanna Hoff forwarded by Metropolitan Police of Scotland Yard, London, on 29th June, 2002. The investigation in the matter was completed and charge-sheet was filed in the year 2003. Learned MM after completion of formalities, committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 10th November, 2003, discharged some of the accused and also opined that since the demand of ransom, after kidnapping of two...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Ambujja Hotels and Real Estates (P) Ltd.Vs. Tourism Corporation Lt ...
Court: Delhi
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes ORDER1. Present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 1st June, 2010 passed in W.P.(C) 3877/2010 whereby the learned Single Judge has issued notice limited to the question of debarment of the appellant from participating in future contracts. It is pertinent to mention that learned Single Judge not only refused to stay the termination of the catering services contract but also directed the appellant to hand over catering services to the respondent-Indian Railway Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. (in short, "IRCTC") positively by 09th June, 2010.2. The relevant facts of the present case are that the respondent- IRCTC is a company duly incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956 established inter alia for the purposes of upgrading, running and managing the caterin...
Tag this Judgment!