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.
Shipra Rastogi Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl. Rev.P. 391/2009 % Reserved on: 15th December, 2011 Decided on: 3rd January, 2012 SHIPRA RASTOGI ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Meenakshi Lekhi, Ms. Srishti Saxena, Advs. versus STATE and ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP for State with SI Sushil Kumar Crime Br. Mr. Satish Tamta, Ms. Ruchi Kapoor, Advs. For R-2. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA.1. By the present revision petition, the Petitioner lays a challenge to the order dated 28th March, 2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby he did not frame a charge under Section 307 IPC against Respondent No.2. and remanded the matter back to the learned Metropolitan Magistrate as all other charges if made out were triable by a Magistrate..2. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that the learned Additional Sessions Judge failed to appreciate that there was sufficient evidence to show that a prima facie case under Section 307 IPC was made ou...
Commissioner of Income Tax-vi Vs. Visual Technologies
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 1873/2010 % Date of Decision : 3rd January, 2012. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI ..... Appellant Through Mr. Sanjeev Rajpal, Advocate versus VISUAL TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through Mr. Salil Kapoor, Mr. Sanat Kapoor, Mr. Ankit Gupta and Mr. Vikas Jain, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR.1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SANJIV KHANNA,J: (ORAL) The present appeal is filed by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) impugns the order dated 17th March, 2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (the Tribunal) in the ITA No.3214(Del)2009 for the assessment year 2006-2007. The question relates to deduction of Rs.83,60,017/- claimed by the assessee under Section 80IC of the Act..2. The Tribunal i...
Sunil Vs. State(Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl. Rev.P. No. 20/2011 % Reserved on: 12/12/ 2011 Decided on: 3rd January, 2012 SUNIL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Hariharan and Mr. Vaibhav Sharma, Advocate versus STATE(NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Manoj Ohri, APP for the State. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA.1. The present petition assails the order dated 3 rd November, 2010 framing charges for offences under Sections 186/353/332/308/34 IPC against the Petitioner..2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that even taking the allegations on the face of it, no offence under Section 308 IPC is made out. The injuries are abrasions caused by blunt weapon which are not possible by an iron rod, as alleged. The injuries could have been caused by fall. Even taking the allegations on their face, giving a brick blow would not make out an offence under Section 308 IPC. As regards, Sections 186/353/332, the events are so intermixed that Sections 186/353 cannot be sepa...
Dlf Ltd Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: 23.11.2011 % Judgment delivered on: 03 .01.2012 + W.P.(C) 8128/2011 and C.M. Nos. 18307-08/2011 DLF LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Soli Sorabjee, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Dhruv Dewan, Ms. Anannya Ghosh and Mr. Anand Misra, Advocates. Versus SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, ASG, with Mr.Neeraj Malhotra, Ms. Mahima Gupta and Mr. Shourjyo Mukherjee, Advocates, for the respondent No.1. Mr. Amit Sibal, Ms. Priyanka Kalra Dar and Mr. Vinay Thripathi, Advocates, for the respondent No..2. Mr. Arvind Nigam, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Shailesh Suman and Ms.Ranjana Roy Gawai, Advocates for the respondent No..3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI JUDGMENT W.P.(C) 8128/2011 Page 1 of 61 VIPIN SANGHI, J..1. The petitioner assails and seeks the quashing of the order dated 20.10.2011 passed by Sh. Prashant Saran, whole time member of the Securities and Exchange Board ...
# Manohar Singh Vs. $ D.S. Sharma and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % C.R.P.200. of 2010 + Date of Decision: 3rd January, 2012 # MANOHAR SINGH .....Petitioner ! Through: In person Versus $ D.S. SHARMA and ANR. ....Respondents Through: Mr.Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: * HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K.BHASIN ORDER P.K BHASIN,J: This revision petition is at the instance of an employee who is fighting against his erstwhile employer, respondent no.2 herein, for getting damages on account of the employer having conducted a malicious enquiry against him. He is aggrieved by the order dated 27.11.2010 passed by the trial Court whereby his application under Section 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC in short) for enlargement of time in making the payment of costs of adjournment imposed on him 09/02/04 has been dismissed. C.R.P. 200/2010 Page 1 of 6.2. The petitioner-plaintiff had filed a suit for damages against the respondents for defaming him by holding a malicious domestic enquiry against him. On 07-01-2004, ...
Vinod Bhatnagar and Others Vs. Sohan Singh and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
$~R -5 to R-7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment: 03.01.2012 + CM(M) No. 65/2007 and CM No462. /2007 VINOD BHATNAGAR and OTHERS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.R.S.Sahni, Advocate. versus SOHAN SINGH AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Sumit Rajput and Mr.Dhiraj, Advocates. AND CM(M) No. 70/2007 and CM No491. /2007 VINOD BHATNAGAR and OTHERS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.R.S.Sahni, Advocate. versus SOHAN SINGH AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Sumit Rajput and Mr.Dhiraj, Advocates. AND CM(M) No. 67/2007 TARLOCHAN SINGH ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.R.S.Sahni, Advocate. versus AMARJEET SINGH ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Sumit Rajput and Mr.Dhiraj, Advocates. CM(M)Nos.65/2007,70/2007 and 67/2007 Page 1 of 11 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J. (Oral).1. CM (M) No.65/2007 and 70/2007 These two petitions have been ari...
B.S. Sial I.P.S. (Retd.) Vs. Union of India Through Secretary to Gover ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A): 1. Shri B.S. Sial, a retired Indian Police Service (IPS) Officer of 1971 batch belonging to Karnataka Cadre reached the rank of Director General of Police (DGP) and IG Prisons by promotion w.e.f. 06.08.2004 and subsequently, was selected as the DGP/IGP as the Head of the State Police Force w.e.f. 31.8.2005 and retired from the said post on 31.12.2006. At the time of his superannuation, he was drawing pay in the 5th CPC pay scale of Rs.24050-26000. It is the case of the applicant that he remained in the said pay scale from 06.8.2004 to 31.12.2005 and his pay was fixed in the 6th CPC scale in the HAG+Scale of pay of Rs.75000-80000. It is stated that the Government of India accepting the recommendations of pay scales/Pay Band has given effect to the same w.e.f. 01.01.2006, though the Union Cabinet accepted the 6th CPC recommendations in the year 2008. His case is that one post of DGP was granted Apex scale of Rs.80000 for the Karnataka State by the Go...
N. Chandan and Others Vs. Union of India, Through, Cabinet Secretary, ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A) 1. The applicants ten in number have joined together in the present OA and are seeking following relief(s):- “(i) Quash and set aside the Order dated 31.03.2010, 16.4.2010, 28.4.2010 and Order dated 15.5.2009. (ii) Declare the date of implementation of the pay scale of Rs.8000-13500 as 1.1.2006 (instead of 1.1.1996) vide Order dated 9.7.2009 as discriminatory and arbitrary. (iii) Direct the Respondents to grant the Applicants the pay scale of Rs.8000-13500 from 1.1.1996 or on completion of 4 years in the scale of Rs.6500-10500 which ever is later (actually from 03.10.2003 and notionally on completion of 4 years) (iv) Direct the Respondents to grant the Applicants the consequential benefits viz arrears of pay and interest thereon. (v) Any other direction which this Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to pass under the facts and circumstances of the case including direction granting cost of litigation to the applicant.” 2. Brief facts br...
S.K. Sinha Vs. Union of India Through the Secretary (Revenue), Ministr ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A): 1. Shri S.K. Sinha, the applicant in the present OA, while working as Assistant Commissioner of Bareilly Customs Division initiated the proceeding for disposal of unclaimed and confiscatable ball bearings through tender with prior intimation to the commissioner, instead of adopting auction as the method of disposal. He sought the approval from the Commissioner alongwith the chart of the highest bid but the same was returned back with the recommendation of re-tendering and the bank draft were returned by the applicant. A Charge Memo dated 20.3.2003 (Annexure-A3) was issued to him which proposed the initiation of major penalty proceedings with the allegation that he had ‘prematurely decided’ to dispose off 5 lots of Ball Bearings, by way of trade notice instead of taking steps for auction and had also not informed the owner of the goods before the disposal and even fixed the reserved price arbitrarily. The said action of the applicant, it...
Mrs. Seema Devi Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi Through Chief Secretary, Del ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-03-2012
George Paracken: 1. In this Original Application, the applicant is seeking a direction to respondent No.2, namely, Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB for short) to consider her candidature for the post of Teacher (Primary) in OBC category against Post Code No.16/08, to declare her result and to send her dossier to respondent No.1, Govt. of NCT of Delhi or to respondent No.3, namely, Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD for short) for her appointment. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 29.10.2007 the applicant applied for the post of Teacher (Primary) against Post Code Nos.164 and 165 of 2007 to DSSSB under the OBC category in response to their advertisement dated 07/07 and 08/07. Along with the application submitted to DSSSB on 29.10.2007, she has attached the provisional certificate dated 23.10.2007 wherein it was stated that her result in the examination was withheld. However, on 29.10.2007 itself, after submitting the application, she received the mark sheet an...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »