Delhi Court December 2011 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.
Jatan Singh and ors Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-2011
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4087/2011 % Judgment delivered on: 22nd December, 2011 JATAN SINGH and ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Sudhir Naagar, Mr. Narveer Dabas, Mr. Siddharth Khanata and Mr. Chetan Chawla Advs. versus STATE and ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms.Rajipa Behura, APP for State. Mr. Parvesh Chaudhary, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral).1. Vide FIR no.452. dated 07.10.2011, case under Section 420/467/468/471/193 Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against the petitioner at PS-Anand Vihar on the complaint of respondent no. 2.2. Ld. Counsel for the petitioners and respondent no.2. jointly submitted that the matter has been settled in Mediation Centre at Karkardooma Court, New Delhi on 26.08.2011, keeping the settlement deed dated 21.08.2011..3. It is further submitted that respondent no.2 is no more interested to pursue the case further as he has settled all the issues qua the Crl.M.C.4087/2011 Pa...
Rk Bansal Vs. Jag Pravesh Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-2011
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment: 22.12.2011 + RC.REV. 226/2010 and CM No. 21535/2011 RK BANSAL ..... Petitioner Through Mr. O.P. Khadaria and Mr. Saurabh Pahura, Advocates. versus JAG PRAVESH SHARMA ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sidhartha Bambha, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J. (Oral).1. The order impugned before this court is the order dated 18.05.2010 whereby an application for leave to defend filed by the tenant-R.K. Bansal in a pending eviction proceedings filed by the landlord-Jag Pravesh Sharma under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Code) had been dismissed..2. Record shows that an eviction petition had been filed by the landlord on the ground of a bonafide requirement as contained in Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as DRCA). The demised property comprise of two shops on the ground floor of...
S.K. Srivastava Vs. Uoi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-2011
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 22nd December, 2011 + W.P.(C) 8324/2011 % S.K. SRIVASTAVA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rakesh Tikku, Sr. Adv. with Mr. S.K. Gupta, Adv. Versus UOI AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. R. Venkataraman, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rajesh Katyal, Adv. CORAM :- HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW JUDGMENT RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J..1. The petition impugns the order dated 23.11.2011 of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench, Delhi dismissing O.A. No.2600/2011 preferred by the petitioner. The said O.A. was preferred challenging the order dated 14.07.2011 vide which the petitioner, an Indian Revenue Service (IRS) Officer of 1987 batch, was posted on promotion W.P.(C) 8324/2011 Page 1 of 28 and transfer as Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) (Appeal), Ranchi. The Tribunal vide ex parte order dated 20.07.2011, while issuing notice of the O.A., had directed that the transfer order be not given e...
Yamaha Motor India P. Ltd Vs. Sarla Sahni and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-2011
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA 444/2003 % 22ND December, 2011 YAMAHA MOTOR INDIA P. LTD. ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Rajat Joneja, Advocate. versus SARLA SAHNI AND OTHERS ..... Respondent Through : Mr. M. Dutta and Ms. S. Bajaj, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL).1. The challenge by means of this Regular First Appeal (RFA) filed under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is to the impugned judgment of the trial Court dated 28.4.2003. By the impugned judgment the suit for recovery of the amount of security deposit filed by the appellant/plaintiff has been dismissed. The suit was dismissed at the initial stage i.e. without evidence being led by both the parties, on the ground that the lease agreement was entered into between M/s Escorts Yamaha Motor Limited, but the suit had been filed by M/s Yamaha Motor India Private Limited. RFA No. 444/2003 Page 1 of 6.2. The facts of ...
Bengali Sweets Centre and Others Vs. Delhi Karamchri Sangh(Regd.)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-2011
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 165/2010 Judgment pronounced on December 22, 2011 BENGALI SWEETS CENTRE and OTHERS ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms.Vidhi Gupta and Mr.Mohit Gupta, Adv. versus DELHI KARAMCHRI SANGH(REGD.) ..... Defendant Through CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI ORDER % 22.12.2011 G.S.SISTANI, J..1. Plaintiff has filed present suit for permanent injunction against the defendant, seeking to restrain defendant, its members, associates, friends, agents, assigns, etc. from holding any demonstration, gate meetings, blockade affecting the ingress and egress of plaintiffs, their customers, other employees, visitors, guests, man and material etc. in any manner whatsoever, staging dharna, slogan, shouting etc. in the building of M/s.Bengali Sweets Centre, G-19, South Extension Part- I, New Delhi-110 049 or anywhere around or outside the building in question..2. Despite service, none appeared on behalf of the defendant. CS(OS) 165/2010 Page 1 of 9 Accordingl...
Mahesh Prasad Singh Vs. Union of India and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-2011
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM No. 16686/2011 in WP(C) No.7357/2011 % Date of Decision: 22.12.2011 Mahesh Prasad Singh .... Petitioner Through Mr.Anil Gautam, Advocate Versus Union of India and Anr. .... Respondents Through Mr.Sunil Kumar, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR ANIL KUMAR, J. * CM No. 16686/2011.1. This is an application by the petitioner/applicant seeking stay of his order of conviction and sentence and confirmation of sentence and for suspension of his sentence and for releasing him on bail. The petitioner/applicant, accused Constable Mahesh Prasad Singh having no. 860650036 of 115 Bn was found guilty of charge u/s 46 of BSF Act punishable u/s 302 of IPC. Pursuant to incident FIR No. 13/2004 dated 16.2.2004 PS. Hilli, Dist South Dinajpur on the complaint of Shri WP(C) No.7357/2011 Page 1 of 8 Sachindra Nath Mahato s/o BAidyanath Mahto, Village Lakma PO Jamalpur PS Hilli, Distt. South Dinajpur was registered.....
Randhir Singh Vs. Central Industrial Security
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-2011
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.7716/2011 % Date of Decision: 22.12.2011 Randhir Singh .... Petitioner Through Mr.Subhashish Mohanty, Advocate. Versus Central Industrial Security Force and Anr. .... Respondents Through Mr.Jatan Singh, Central Government Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR ANIL KUMAR, J. * CM No.17479/2011 Allowed subject to all just exceptions. WP(C) No.7716/2011.1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 15th February, 2006 and order dated 30th June, 2007 imposing major penalty on the petitioner of "reduction of pay by three stages from Rs.3800 to 3575/- in the time scale of pay of Rs.3050-75-3950-80-4590/- for a period of 2 years with further directions that the petitioner will not earn increment of pay during the period of reduction and that on expiry of this period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing his future increments of pay." WP(C) No.7716/2011 Page 1 of 15.2. The p...
Ashok Kumar Khanna Vs. Johnson and Johnson Co. and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-2011
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on : 20th December, 2011 % Judgment delivered on : 22ndDecember, 2011 + RFA (OS) 32/2011 ASHOK KUMAR KHANNA ....Appellant Through : Mr.Pawan Kr.Bahl, Advocate. versus JOHNSON and JOHNSON CO. and ANR. ....Respondents Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J..1. Present appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and decree dated 01.11.2010 passed by learned Single Judge whereby the suit filed by the appellant for permanent injunction, recovery and damages, was dismissed except decreeing the suit for a sum of `30,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum..2. The appellant is the sole proprietor of M/s.N.S.K. Enterprises. He came to know that respondent No.1 wanted to allot the distributorship for G.B.Pant Hospital, Delhi. Vide letter dated 29.06.1999, he submitted a detailed letter seeking the right of distributorship..3. G.B.Pant Hospital, Delhi, responde...
Dr. Asit Gupta Vs. Union of India Through the Secretary, Railway Board ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-2011
(ORAL) 1. Applicant has filed this OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: “(a)quash and set aside the “Impugned Order” passed by the Respondent No.1 vide Order No.2006/E(O)II/24/42 dated 07/07/2011 issued by the Respondent No-1, and (b)direct the Respondents to commute the pension of the applicant herein as on 26.09.2005 i.e. the date of the Applicant’s voluntary retirement from service, with interest, and (c)pass any other or further order as my be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, and (d)grant cost of this application to the applicants.” 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the applicant took voluntary retirement from service w.e.f. 26.09.2005. After his voluntary retirement respondents invoking the provisions of Rule-9 of the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, instituted departmental proceedings against applicant vide memorandum dated 31.07.2006. From the material placed on record, it is evident tha...
Ved Pal Vs. the President, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ne ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-2011
Mrs. Meera Chhibber, Member (J) 1. Applicant was served with a charge-sheet dated 29.08.2008 with the following allegations: “That Shri Ved Pal while working as Laboratory Technician is responsible for dereliction /negligence of duty as he allowed Shri Sanjeev Kumar, Laboratory Technician unauthorizedly for ECG testing of Ms.Binapani Sharma on 19.01.2007 in E.C.G. Room No.32, 2nd Floor, OPD Block, AIIMS, New Delhi in his place. Shri Sanjeev Kumar took advantage of this situation and molested Ms.Binapani Sharma. This act of Shri Ved Pal is unbecoming of an Institute employee, amounts to a serious misconduct and he failed to maintain devotion of duty. Shri Ved Pal, is, thus responsible for gross misconduct failed to main devotion of duty and has acted in a manner unbecoming of an Institute employee, thereby contravening Rule 3 (1) (ii) (iii) of this CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964 as applicable to the employees of the Institute.” 2. Applicant gave his reply requesting the authoriti...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »