Delhi Court May 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.
Sh.Amit Chandra Vs. Sh.K.Chandra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-03-2011
1. This appeal has impugned the judgment and decree dated 24.5.2007 which had endorsed the finding of the trial judge dated 24.3.2005 whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff K.Chandra seeking possession of the suit property i.e. the property bearing No.498-B/6, Govindpuri, Kalkaji, New Delhi had been decreed in his favaour. 2. The facts as is evident from the pleadings is that Sheela Dixit, the deceased second wife of the plaintiff was the owner of the aforenoted suit property. She had purchased a plot and raised construction upon it. Defendant no.1 who is the son of the plaintiff was borne out of his first marriage; he was in need of a place for shelter. Plaintiff allowed defendant no.1 and his wife to occupy one room and a kitchen on the first floor of the aforenoted property on a licence basis without any charges. After the marriage of their second son there was a paucity of accommodation and thus the plaintiff requested the defendants to vacate the portion which was in their occupa...
Dr. Prem Lata Vs. Gnct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-03-2011
1. The petition concerns appointment to the Office of the President of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (District Forum), Delhi; advertisements inviting applications to the said post were published in the newspapers on 18th March, 2010 by the Food Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department of Government of NCT of Delhi. Seventy Two (72) applications including that of the petitioner were received. In accordance with Section 10(1A) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Consumer Act) a Selection Committee was constituted. The Selection Committee made its recommendation for filling up the vacancies in the Office of five District Fora in Delhi by preparing a panel, valid for one year. The said recommendation also provided: "In case the candidates selected fail to join within 45 days of offer of appointment, the appointment will lapse and the second or third person as the case may be in preference will be offered the appointment. During the course of interview on our query the candid...
Puja Dubey Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-03-2011
1. Ansh Kumar Dubey, aged 12 years, son of the Petitioner Puja Dubey and Lt. Col. Ajay Kumar Dubey, died on 8th June 2007 during the Parasailing Camp organised by the Army Wives Welfare Association (`AWWA) conducted by the Jat Regimental Centre (`JRC) Bareilly. The Court of Inquiry (`COI), constituted by the Station Headquarters Cell, in its Report submitted on 2nd July 2007 came to the conclusion that there does not appear to be any case of willful negligence of specific nature and that the fatal accident took place as a result of the failure of the ad hoc safety pins getting hooked off/released in the Parasail. 2. In this writ petition, the first prayer is that the findings, opinions and directions of the COI held at Bareilly should be quashed and a fresh COI be held within a fixed timeframe in accordance with the Army Act, 1950 and Rules made thereunder by associating the Petitioner and her husband. The second prayer is for a direction to the Ministry of Defence (`MOD) (Respondent N...
Consulting Engineering Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the Chairman, Es ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-03-2011
1. The present appeal filed under Section 82 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.02.2002 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, ESI Court, Delhi in ESI Petition No.19/99, whereby it was held that the appellant is covered by the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and is not entitled to the relief claimed by it in the petition filed under Section 75 of the Act. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the petition under the aforesaid Act are that the appellant-Company is a private limited company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 with its registered office at 57, Nehru Place, Manjusha building, 5th Floor, New Delhi-110019. It was established in May, 1969 as a professional Architectural/Engineering Consultancy Organisation having no association with any contractor/manufacturer/supplier and renders comprehensive consultancy services starting from initial fact findin...
Sap Aktiengesellschaft and anr. Vs. Mr. Sadiq Pasha Proprietor, M/S. N ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-03-2011
1. This is a suit seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of copyright of the plaintiffs, delivery up of infringing material and rendition of accounts of profits, etc. Plaintiff No.1 is a company incorporated in Germany, whereas plaintiff No.2 is its Indian subsidiary, responsible for sales of SAP solutions, implementation, post-implementation support, training and certification of its customers and partners in India. Plaintiff No.1 claims to be global leader in developing application software products for real time business developing process and also claim to be worlds largest inter-enterprise software company and worlds third largest overall independent supplier. It employs nearly 30,000 people in 50 countries including India. It is alleged that in early 70s plaintiff No.1 developed RF System, an automatic accounting and transaction- processing programme that featured standard software and real-time computing and later came to be referred as R/1. It is alleged that the...
Lt Col G.S. Walia Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: May-03-2011
1. The petitioner vide this petition has prayed that the order dated 19.01.2009 be quashed by which the petitioners statutory compliant was disposed of by the Government. It is also prayed that order dated 20.12.2007 rejecting his non statutory complaint also be quashed. It is also prayed that ICR covering the period June, 2004 to February, 2005 be set aside due to technical infirmity and reports with regard to January 2000 to May 2000, July 2002 to May 2003 and June 2004 to February 2005 be thoroughly scrutinized and in case of any inconsistency by any of the Reporting Officers the same may be expunged on the ground of inconsistency and subjectivity. Respondents be also directed to consider the case of the petitioner as a Special Review Fresh Case by the next Selection Board for promotion to the post of Substantive Col. 2. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner was commissioned into Inf (22 Grenadiers) on 16.12.1989 and served the Army at various places. He has also served in...
Ram Bresh Singh Yadav Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: May-03-2011
1. This O.A has been brought for quashing the order awarding severe reprimand to the applicant. It has been pointed out that the punishment of severe reprimand was awarded without adhering to the procedures under the Army Act and the Rules made thereunder and affording him an opportunity of being heard. The punishment of severe reprimand without adhering to the procedures should not have been taken into account while considering him for promotion to the rank of Subedar Major. 2. The applicant joined Army on 4.1.1983 as Sapper Clerk (GD). In July 1986, he was promoted to the rank of Naik, in January 1989 as Havildar and in January 1999 as Naib Subedar. On 19.5.1999, the identity card issued to him was lost, which was informed to his senior official. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him, which resulted in awarding him a severe reprimand. On 22.3.2006, the applicant was promoted to the rank of Subedar. During 2008 and 2009, he was denied promotion to the rank of Subedar Maj...
Kartar Singh Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-02-2011
1. In these intra-Court appeals, orders dated 21st September, 2004 and 23rd September, 2004 passed in the Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 3178 and 3179/1989 are under challenge. By order dated 21st September, 2004, CM No. 11099/2004 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3178/1989 and CM No. 11100/2004 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3179/1989 have been dismissed. By order dated 23rd September, 2004, the two writ petitions have been dismissed as infructuous. 2. The two writ petitions were filed impugning interim orders dated 2nd June, 1989, 5th July, 1989 and 19th July, 1989 passed by the Central Government in exercise of power under Section 30 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulations and Development) Act, 1957 (Act, for short). The first order dated 2nd June, 1989 directed the Government of Haryana to submit all records pertaining to applications of the applicants, the appellant herein and Haryana Minerals Limited for mining leases for silica sand at two different locations in Faridabad district in the S...
M/S. Impex Services and anr. Vs. the Oriental Fire and General Insuran ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-02-2011
1. This suit for recovery of insured amount plus interest, i.e., Rs.23 lacs pertains to marine insurance policy taken by the plaintiffs from defendant No.1 in respect of their consignment of goods (PVC Resin) shipped by defendants 2 and 3 from Singapore to the plaintiffs in India and the said goods were purportedly covered under these two Insurance Cover Notes of 19th June and 10th August, 1979 respectively. Purportedly, the first policy was in respect of cost, insurance and freight whereas the second policy was for the profits. It is plaintiffs projection that in pursuance to the Contract of 11th June, 1979 between the plaintiffs and defendants 2 and 3, aforesaid consignment valued at Rs.13,22,912/- was loaded on vessel "S.S.OH DAI" at Singapore for being delivered at Bombay under the contract of freightment contained in the Bill of lading of 1st September, 1979 issued by Union Shipping Ltd. i.e. defendant No.6 and the said consignment was insured with defendant No.1 who had issued pr...
Kartar Singh Vs. Directorate of Education and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-02-2011
1. The petitioner, in pursuance to an advertisement dated 4 th June, 2006 inviting applications for the post of Art/Drawing Teachers in the department of the respondent no.1 had so applied under the reserved category. The petitioner relied upon a Scheduled Caste Certificate issued by the State of Rajasthan. The petitioner appeared in the competitive examination held for the said purpose but in the result declared on 2 nd September, 2007 the name of the petitioner did not find mention in the list of successful/selected candidates. The petitioner on 5 th August, 2008 applied under the Right to Information Act and in response thereto learnt that though the marks secured by him were more than the marks of the last selected candidate in the reserved category but the petitioner was not selected owing to not having the requisite qualification. The petitioner contending that Directorate of College Education, Government of Rajasthan from where he had obtained a five year diploma, was amongst th...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- Next ›
- Last »