Delhi Court March 2011 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
Pooja Sharma and ors Vs. Morarji Desai National Institute of Yoga
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-29-2011
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 the Digest? No1. The petitioner Ms. Pooja Sharma, a student of the one year Diploma course in Yoga of the respondent Institute has filed this writ petition when stopped from appearing in the examination owing to not having the requisite attendance. It is not in dispute that as per the rules of the respondent Institute the petitioner was required to attend, separately, minimum 80% of the theory & 80% of the practical classes. The rules further provide that students having attendance below 80% would not be eligible for appearing in the examination. Discretion to give benefit of 5% attendance on medical ground has been vested in the competent authority of the respondent Institute.2. According to the petitioner she had 83% attendance in theory and 69% attendance in the practical classes. Notice of the petition was issued on the...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Shri Sunil Kumar and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-29-2011
1. Whether reporters of the local papers be allowed to see the judgment? YES2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? YES 3 Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? YES1. Calling in question the defensibility and justifiability of the order dated 31.8.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.4298/2010 the present intra-Court appeal has been preferred.2. The respondents invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for stay of the departmental proceedings instituted against them till the trial, in FIR No.106/2009 instituted for offences punishable under Sections 323, 341 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), was finalized/pending or till the time cross-examination of the witnesses in the criminal trial was over.3. The essential expose of facts are that the respondents are employees of the appellant company and they have been associated with various employees associations and have been espo...
In the Matter of the Companies Act, 1956 Vs. M/S. Vodafone Essar Limit ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-29-2011
1. Four companies have moved this Court under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking sanction of the Scheme of Arrangement between M/s. Vodafone Essar Limited (hereinafter referred to as the transferor company no. 1); M/s. Vodafone Essar Mobile Services Limited (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner/ transferor company no. 2); M/s. Vodafone Essar East Limited (hereinafter referred to as the transferor company no. 3); M/s. Vodafone Essar Gujarat Limited (hereinafter referred to as the transferor company no.4); M/s. Vodafone Essar South Limited (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner/transferor company no. 5); M/s. Vodafone Essar Digilink Limited (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner/transferor company no. 6); M/s. Vodafone Essar Cellular Limited (hereinafter referred to as the transferor company no. 7) and M/s. Vodafone Essar Infrastructure Limited (hereinafter referred to as the transferee company).2. The registered offices of the petitioner/transferor compa...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. M/S Ravi Builders
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-29-2011
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? YES1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant assailing the judgment dated 12.09.2005 delivered by the learned ADJ in having dismissed the objections filed by the appellant to an award dated 10.06.2004 made by the sole Arbitrator.2. Briefly stating the facts of this case are that the respondent who was awarded a contract for the work of construction of 24 numbers Type IV Quarters at Gulabi Bagh, Phase-II vide order No.D/EE-VII/92- 93/4 dated 06.07.1992 executed between the parties could not complete the work and as such differences and disputes arose between the parties which as per the orders passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court were referred to Mr. B.S. Sekhon, who was appointed as a sole Arbitrator vide its order dated 17.05.2004 in the Arbitration Petition.3. After entering into the reference, t...
Mamta and ors. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
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? Yes1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant who claims to be the dependents of the deceased assailing the impugned judgment dated 12.09.2008 whereby the Railway Claims Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition filed by the appellants under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunals Act. By filing the claim petition the appellants have claimed that on 26.05.2006 the deceased late Bharat Singh the husband of the first appellant was going to his cousins house at Meerut by Dehradun Express. The deceased was travelling on a valid purchased ticket from Delhi junction to Meerut City by Dehradun Express Train. He has boarded the train from Delhi Junction but as the train was over-crowded, the deceased could not pass the gallery of the train to get a seat/berth, and when the train reached near Bihari Colony, Shad...
Smt Chamno Devi Vs. Smt Usha and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
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? Yes1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the impugned judgment dated 4.11.2008 passed by the Additional District Judge, Tis Hazari in Probate Case No.236/06/04 granting probate of the Will Ex.PW1/2 in favour of Smt.Usha, respondent No.1 subject to her complying with other formalities. The grant of probate was further made subject to the following:-" .the exact measurement and valuation of the land and house in question shall be got ascertained from the collector concerned before completion of necessary formalities. An inventory of the properties of the deceased shall be exhibited in Court within six months from the date of grant of certificate of Letter of Administration and the petitioner shall thereafter file a statement of account within one year. It is clarified that question of right, tit...
J.S.Shahi Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
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? 1. The writ petitioner who has been superseded for promotion at the DPC held on 14.3.2007 has questioned his supersession alleging that the adverse remark in the ACR for the period 1.4.2003 to 31.3.2004, which was considered by the DPC and is responsible for petitioners supersession be quashed and a direction be issued to the respondents to convene a Review DPC to re-consider the candidature of the petitioner by ignoring the adverse remark entered in the ACR. The adverse remarks are as under:- "A young and smart officer. Needs more exposure to border duties. Should inculcate the value of physical fitness and mental robustness to lead the men with professional competence."2. It may be noted that for the year in question the Initiating Officer graded the petitioner Very Good which was scaled down to Average by the Revie...
Mrs. Anil Nandwani Vs. Food Corporation of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
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? Yes 1. The common question that arises in these two petitions is whether it was open to the petitioners to withdraw their offer of voluntary retirement in terms of which, their retirement would come into effect only after three months, and not before; because, instead of accepting the offer on the terms proposed by them, the respondent had purported to accept it with effect from an earlier date. Alternatively, it is contended that in any case, a later circular of the respondent enabled them to seek its withdrawal and the respondent was bound to accede to their request in terms thereof.2. Mr. Saini, who appears for the petitioners in both the writ petitions, submits that the relevant facts of both are substantially the same. He therefore, addressed arguments with reference to the relevant facts of Mrs. Anil Nan...
B.R.Sharma Vs. Syndicate Bank
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? (No)2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? (No)3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? (No) 1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner who was employed as an Assistant Manager in Junior Management Grade ScaleI(JMGS-I) in the respondent Bank and had been denied promotion to the Middle Management Grade Scale-II(MMGS-II). He had challenged the denial of promotion to him by filing the present writ petition. 2. The petitioner was recruited by the respondent bank as a clerk in 1974 and he claims that as a result of his excellent performance he was promoted to the JMGS-I in 1978. Further promotion from JMGS-I was to MMGS-II. The respondent bank had framed a promotion policy dated 16/04/90 and para no. 11.10 of that promotion policy provided that the maximum number of officers to be considered for promotion for MMGS-II were to be restri...
Tata Sons Ltd. Vs. Manoj Dodia and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-28-2011
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 Yes in Digest?1. These are suits filed by Tata Sons Ltd. for permanent injunction, damages, rendition of accounts and delivery of the infringing materials. The plaintiff company, which was established in the year 1917, is the principal investment holding company of the Tata Group which had a turnover of Rs.96,000 crores for the year 2005-2006 and is stated to be one of Indias most trusted business houses. The name TATA is stated to have been derived from the surname of its founder Mr. Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata. For the year 2006, Tata Group was also ranked as 20th amongst worlds most reputed companies. The name TATA is being used by the plaintiff company since its inception in the year 1917 and it is claimed that on account of its highly descriptive nature and pioneering activities of the founder, the name TATA has consisten...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »