Delhi Court September 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.
Shri Syed Zakir Ali Rizvi Vs. Union of India: Through Secretary, New D ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-20-2011
Mrs. Meera Chhibber, Member (J) 1. Applicant has sought the following relief:- “(i)That this Hon’ble Tribunal may be further pleased to direct the respondents to consider the case of the applicant in the light of para 1305 of Indian Railway Establishment Manual Volume-I and post the applicant as Senior Crew Controller/Instructor in Training School for which vacancies are available. (ii)That this Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to grant any other or further relief to the applicant which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case”. 2. The brief facts, as stated by the applicant are that he had joined as Assistant Loco Pilot. Due to his satisfactory performance, he was promoted as Loco Pilot (Passenger) and then as Loco Inspector. 3. While working as Loco Inspector, applicant was declared medically unfit in A-3 but was fit for B-1 and below. As per para 1305 of IREM Volume-I, he ought to have b...
Baldev Raj, Retd. and Others Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi Throug ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-20-2011
Mr. M.L. Chauhan, Member (J): 1. Applicants have filed this OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: “That the applicants be brought at par with re-designated vaccination Cadre in the matter of pay scales and the ASI’s be placed at least in the pay scale of 425-640 w.e.f. 01.01.1973 as given to Vaccinators and subsequently higher pay scales be granted to the S.I.’s CSI’s and Sanitation Superintendents in the interest of justice. The applicants pay scale may kindly be re-determined and their pays be re-fixed accordingly.” 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the applicants were promoted to the posts of Assistant Sanitary Inspector (ASI) on different dates in the years 1964 to 1978 as per the dates mentioned in Annexure “A” and they have also retired from the Corporation as Health Inspectors in the years 2003, 2004 and two of them on 31.05.2000 and 31.12.2008. The grievance of the applicants in this case is regarding parity in the ...
Kuldeep Singh Vs. Union of India and Others Through the General Manage ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-20-2011
1. Shri Kuldeep Singh, the applicant herein, was initially appointed as Depot Store Keeper-III with the Railways. He was promoted as DMS-II again as DMS-I. On 22.09.2004, the applicant joined Delhi Metro Railway Service on deputation basis for a period of 5 years on 13.03.2008. He submitted his application for technical resignation for permanent absorption in DMRC, New Delhi. His technical resignation was accepted w.e.f. 28.03.2008 by granting him the extension of deputation tenure w.e.f. 22.09.2007 to 27.03.2008. The applicant submitted the relevant papers on 14.05.2008 to release his retirement benefits within time. His lien was terminated on 12.01.2009 after which the applicant submitted one more representation dated 6.07.2009 to expedite the settlement of his retirement dues. On 10.06.2009, the second respondent gave a no claim certificate in favour of the applicant. Although the amount of leave encashment, GIS contribution were received by him on 27.06.2009, the applicant’s ...
Anil Kumar Dhyani Vs. Union of India Through: Secretary, Ministry of D ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-20-2011
Mr. M.L. Chauhan, Member (J): 1. This RA has been filed by the applicant for reviewing the order dated 1.8.2011 whereby while disposing of the OA this Tribunal has quashed the impugned order dated 9.12.2009 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and order dated 27.11.2009 passed by the Appellate Authority and the matter was remitted back to the inquiry officer to proceed in the matter afresh by supplying/making available the copies of the listed documents to the applicant. 2. By way of this RA, which in fact is in the nature of an Miscellaneous Application for correction of the typographical mistake inasmuch as the impugned order passed by the disciplinary authority, which has been mentioned as 09.12.2009 was in fact order dated 31.12.2008. Thus the review applicant submits that para-8 of the judgment dated 1.8.2011 may be rectified to the extent that the date 09.12.2009 be substituted to that of 31.12.2008. 3. In view of what has been stated above, the present RA is allowed in circulati...
Govt of Nct of Delhi Vs. M/S Mbl Infrastructure Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2011
1. The petitioner-Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) has filed this petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) to assail the arbitral award dated 11.05.2010 passed by Shri S.P. Banwait, Sole Arbitrator, whereby he has re-affirmed his finding contained in his earlier award dated 15.06.2009 to the effect that the petitioner herein, who was the respondent before the Arbitral Tribunal, is liable to pay service tax to the respondent/claimant. 2. The petitioner awarded the contract for comprehensive maintenance of Ring Road and Outer Ring Road for a period of three years to the respondent-contractor. The stipulated date of start of the contract was 24.08.2005 and the stipulated date of completion was 23.08.2008. 3. Disputes arose between the parties during the currency of the work which were first referred to the Dispute Resolution Expert by the Chief Engineer, PWD Maintenance Zone M-3 in terms of para 21.1 of the General Condit...
Bhagwandas Auto Finance Ltd. and ors. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2011
1. Respondent No.2 in the above-captioned petitions i.e. Vikas International (Hong Kong) Ltd. has filed Criminal Complaint No.16736/2006 before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate praying that the four accused listed therein be punished for having committed offences punishable under Section 420/120-B IPC. 2. Accused No.1 is Bhagwan Dass Auto Finance Ltd. accused No.3 and 4 are Shri Ravinder Aggarwal and Shri Vishal Aggarwal, the Managing Director and Director respectively of accused No.1. Accused No.2 Shri Ravi Bhartia, is stated to be the authorized signatory of accused No.1. The complaint reads as under:- "CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AGAINST THE ABOVE ACCUSED PERSONS FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 420/120-B OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE. Sir, It is respectfully submitted as under:- 1. That Vikas International (Hong Kong) Ltd. is a subsidiary of Vikas Projects Pvt. Ltd., a Company incorporated under The Companies Act, 1956 and deals in the business of Export/Import and acting as a commission A...
Commandant Shamsher Singh Malik Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2011
1. With the promulgation of the Coast Guard Act 1978, a cadre of Coast Guards was created by hiving off a wing of the Indian Navy. A distinct and separate service with separate cadre was constituted. Various posts were notified with eligibility and service conditions thereto. 2. The hierarchical structure of the Coast Guard Service is as follows: - Director General - Inspector General - Deputy Inspector General - Commandant - Commandant (Junior Grade) - Deputy Commandant - Assistant Commandant. 3. The petitioner was appointed in the year 1982 as Assistant Commandant (Technical) in the Coast Guard Service and earned promotion in the year 1993 as Commandant. 4. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 123(1) of the Coast Guard Act 1978, the Central Government framed the Coast Guard (Seniority and Promotion) Rules 1987, (hereinafter referred to as the „1987 Rules). Rule 7 of the 1987 Rules reads as under:- "7. Promotion rules. - (1) Officers shall be eligible for promotion aga...
Baljinder Kaur and ors. Vs. Sanjiv Saini and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2011
1. The short question which arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether the Insurance Company can repudiate a claim made by the legal representatives of a deceased person in respect of a vehicle which is duly insured with the Company solely on the ground that the driver of the vehicle did not hold a valid licence even though the vehicle was stationary at the time of the accident and the driver of the vehicle had nothing to do with the accident? 2. Concisely, the facts are that on 28.06.2005 at about 6:30 p.m. one Gurcharan Singh (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased") met with an accident while welding a stationary truck bearing Registration No. HR-38-G-5351, at Transport Nagar, Samaipur Badli, Delhi, and died due to electrocution. A DD entry bearing No.19-A dated 28.06.2005 was recorded under Section 174 Cr.P.C. with regard to the aforesaid accident by the Police of Police Station, Samaipur Badli, Delhi. A claim petition was filed by the appellant No.1, who is the wi...
Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) Vs. the Institute of Chartered Acc ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2011
1. Director of Income Tax (Exemption) has filed the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (1961 Act, for short). It is submitted that the following questions of law arise for consideration:- A. Whether ITAT was justified in the eyes of law in the facts and circumstances of the present case in passing the impugned order ignoring that the DIT(E) has passed the order u/s 263 of the Act because the AO had not made necessary inquiries during the assessment proceedings in reaching the conclusion? B. Whether the ITAT was justified in the eyes of law in the facts and circumstance of the present case in passing the impugned order that running of the coaching classes is a business activity and therefore is in violation of the provisions of Income Tax as also supported by Judgment of the Patna High Court cited in 208 ITR 608? C. Whether the impugned order passed by the ITAT is perverse both in law and facts of the present case? 2. The respondent is the Institute of Charter...
Amit Chaturvedi and ors. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2011
1. Petitioners Amit Chaturvedi, Sanjay Chaturvedi, Sumit Chaturvedi and their father H.V.Chaturvedi pray to this Court that FIR No.702/2004 be quashed. They allege that they have compromised the matter with the persons who had deposited various amounts with companies floated by them and rely upon a Memorandum of Settlement. Justifying their plea that the complainants are only 30 in number, whom they have impleaded as R-2 to R-31 in the above captioned petition, they rely upon the list of witnesses filed along with the charge-sheet filed by the Investigating Officer before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate. 2. Order sheet of this Court in the instant petition would reveal that from time to time an attempt was made to verify from R-2 to R-31 whether they have compromised the matter and received the amounts invested by them with the companies floated by the petitioners and those of whom could be contacted, as recorded in the various orders passed, have affirmed that they have received t...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »