Delhi Court January 2012 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.
Ved Prakash Sharma Vs. Delhi Jal Board Through Chief Executive Officer ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2012
Shailendra Pandey, Member (A): 1. Aggrieved by the respondent’s order dated 07.02.1011, the applicant had filed Writ Petition (C) No.3369/2011, in the High Court of Delhi, which was dismissed on the ground of non-maintainability but gave liberty to the applicant to challenge the said order dated 07.02.2011 before this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, if so advised. 2. The present OA has been filed seeking the following reliefs: Order the applicant’s regularization against the post of the Beldar in accordance with the formula prescribed as contained in respondent’s Circular dated 6.11.1985, Direct the respondents to make payment of back wages, with interest, after granting him whatever promotion the applicant would have been entitled to if he had been regularized in accordance with Circular dated 6.11.1985 and Grant all retiral benefits to the applicant consequent upon his retirement with effect from 30.11.2005. Grant any other relie...
Surender Singh (Ex. Constable) Vs. Union of India Through Lt. Governor ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2012
M.L. Chauhan: 1. The applicant has filed the present OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs:- “a. Set aside/quash the order dated 10-5-2011 passed by the Office of Deputy Commissioner of Delhi Police, IGI, Airport, New Delhi (Annexure-P-1) and consequential set aside the findings of the Enquiry Officer, the order dated 14-5-1998 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the order dated 27-1-1998 passed by the Appellate Authority with all consequential benefits. b. direct the respondents to reinstate the applicant in service with all consequential benefits including pay and allowances, seniority etc. as the applicant has been acquitted by the Ld. Appellate Court in criminal case arising out of same set of facts and documents/evidence on record. c. award costs of these proceedings in favour of the applicant and against the respondents: and/or d. pass such other/further order (s) as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case ...
Uttam Chand Nahta Vs. Union of India: Through Secretary, Ministry of C ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2012
M.L. Chauhan, Member (J): 1. Applicant, while working as Regional Director, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Kolkata, applied for the post of Member (Technical), Company Law Board (CLB), pursuant to the circular dated 30.06.2009 for filling up the posts of Members (Judicial) and Member (Technical) in the CLB. Subsequently, applicant received a letter dated 09.10.2009, whereby he was asked to convey his willingness immediately for appointment to the post of Member (Technical) in the CLB, if selected, and the applicant conveyed his willingness on the same day. Applicant received offer of appointment as Member (Technical) in the CLB on 18.12.2009 vide letter dated 18.12.2009, whereby he was informed that he has been appointed as Member (Technical) in CLB in the pay scale of Rs.67000-79000/- till the age of 62 years or till the winding up of the Company Law Board and the National Company Law Board Tribunal is constituted/operationalised or until further orders, whichever is the earliest. It ...
Surinder Singh Vs. the Secretary, Ministry of Defence (Finance), New D ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2012
George Paracken: 1. This is the second round of litigation by the applicant before this Tribunal. In the first round of litigation, the applicant challenged the Annexure A-16 order of the disciplinary authority dated 25.4.2003 imposing upon him the punishment of ‘compulsory retirement from service’ w.e.f. 30.4.2003 and the Annexure A-17 order of the Appellate Authority dated 31.12.2003 rejecting his appeal dated 4.6.2003 and the reminder dated 8.9.2003, vide OA No.1169/2004 and the same was allowed by setting aside the aforesaid orders but with liberty to the respondents to proceed further in the matter in accordance with law, mainly on the following grounds: “(1) The officer who passed the order of punishment was not competent to pass the same, not being the disciplinary authority of the respondent. (2) Though the inquiry officer had held that three charges were partly proved and two charges were not proved, the disciplinary authority disagreed with the same and held...
M/S Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd Vs. Cce, Kanpur
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2012
Per Mathew John, J. 1. In this proceeding four Appeals filed by M/s Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. are being considered. All the Appeals relate to admissibility of Cenvat credit taken by the Appellants, broadly during the period November 1997 to October 1999, though the reasons for admissibility and the period involved in each of the appeals are different. It is considered proper to examine each Appeal separately. Appeal No. E/1218/2005 2. In this Appeal the total disputed amount is Rs.14,08,949/- this amount is classified under three different headings and the submissions of the Appellants are recorded as under :- 2.1. Non Filing of Declaration under Rule 173 G CER 1944 before Receipt of Inputs (credit of Rs.14,25,580/-) Since various suppliers denote their products by varying specific names and as Appellant have been manufacturing customs built equipment, it was not always possible to declare the inputs especially fitments/components with specific nomenclature used by their supp...
Ashok Narang Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL. APPEAL No. 932/2009 % Judgment reserved on: 20th September, 2011 Judgment delivered on: 12th January, 2012 ASHOK NARANG ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Rajender Kumar, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Ritu Gauba, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J..1. Vide the instant appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment dated 06.10.2009 whereby he was held guilty and convicted and by order on sentence dated 09.10.2009, he was sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 07 years for the offence under Section 363 Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 of which he stands convicted with payment of fine of ` 5,000/- for the said offence..2. He also sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 10 years for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 with payment of `5,000/-. Crl. Appeal No.932/2009 Page 1 of 70.3. He further sentenced to undergo R...
In the Matter of Vs. Dda
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.400/2011 and C.M. No.782/2011 Decided on : 12.01.2012 IN THE MATTER OF SANMUKH SINGH ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. R.K. Saini, Adv. with Mr.Vikas Saini and Mr. Vikram Saini, Advs. versus DDA ..... Respondent Through: Dr. Indra Pratap Singh, Adv. CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J. (ORAL).1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for directions to the respondent/DDA to allot him a MIG flat under the New Pattern Registration Scheme, 1979 (NPRS-1979) in lieu of cancellation of allotment of a MIG flat made in his favour in the draw of lots held in the year 2002..2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. It is the case of the petitioner that in the year 1979, the respondent/DDA announced a scheme for allotment of flats to be built under MIG, LIG and in Janta Category. The petitioner applied for and got himself registered for allotment of a MIG flat under the aforesaid NPRS-1979, after w...
Delhi Development Authority Vs. M/S. W.S. Construction Co
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2012
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 12.01.2012 + FAO(OS) 233/2002 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ...APPELLANT VERSUS M/S. W.S. CONSTRUCTION CO. ...RESPONDENT Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Advocate For the Respondent: None CORAM :- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J (ORAL).1. The appellant/DDA awarded a contract to the respondent for construction of 320 MIG houses at Jahangirpuri under agreement no.44/EE/DDV/81-82. The disputes arose inter se the parties and on account of an arbitration clause in the agreement, the respondent filed an application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). The said application was allowed by the learned Single Judge of this court vide order dated 23.02.1987 directing the Engineer Member, DDA (the designated authority) to appoint an Arbitrator. Mr. V.D. Tiwari was thereafter appoin...
M/S. Starnet Communications Pvt. Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 12.01.2012 + WP (C) No.4947/2011 M/s. STARNET COMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Darpan Wadhwa, Mr.Rajat Vohra and Mr.Shankh Sengupta, Advocates. versus BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED (BSNL).... Respondent Through: Mr. H.S. Phoolka, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sharat Kapoor, Mr. Noor Alam, Mr.C.B.Tiwari and Mr. Kunwar Faisal, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J. (ORAL).1. The petitioner lays a challenge to the action of the respondent in issuing the impugned termination letter dated 08.03.2011 and cancelling the Letter of Intent (LOI for short) dated 16.04.2010 in favour of the petitioner who was the L-1 qua the Haryana Licence Service Area (LSA for short) for deployment of WiMAX e _____________________________________________________________________________________ WPC No.4947/2011 Page 1 of 18 Wireless Broadband Solution. The respondent/BSNL is...
Raj Kumar Agarwal Vs. State Bank of Patiala and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision : 12.01.2012 + WP (C) No.6729 of 2010 RAJ KUMAR AGARWAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. K. Kumar, Advocate. Versus STATE BANK OF PATIALA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Irfan Ahmed, Advocate for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J. (Oral) WP (C) No.6729/2010.1. Rule DB..2. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 accepts notice..3. At request of learned counsels for the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal..4. The failure of the borrowers and guarantor to repay the amount resulted in a suit being filed by respondent No.1-Bank against respondents 2 and 3 and the predecessor-in-interest of the appellant, Late Shri Naresh Kumar Aggarwal, (the father). The father of the appellant was a guarantor while respondent No.3 is the sole proprietor of respondent No.2, the borrower..5. The defendants in the suit failed to enter appearance resulting in t...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »