Delhi Court November 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.
Vinod Kumar Sandlesh Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:20. 11.2012 W.P.(C) 4279/2012 VINOD KUMAR SANDLESH ... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner For the Respondent : Mr R. Venkataramani, Sr. Adv. with Mr Rajesh Gogna, Ms Joytika Kalra & Mr Aljo K. Joseph, Advs. : Mr M.K. Bhardwaj, Adv. with Mr Amit Chadha, Adv R-1/UOI Mr Devesh Singh, Adv. for R-2 & 3 CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J 1.This writ petition has been preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 10.07.2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi. By virtue of the impugned order dated 10.07.2012, the Tribunal has dismissed three Original Applications being OA No. 4640/2011, OA No. 156/2012 and OA No. 313/2012 as also the C.P. No. 407/2012 arising out of OA No. 313/201 while upholding the ...
Brijpal Singh Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
$~R-26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: November 20, 2012 + W.P.(C) 5763/2000 BRIJPAL SINGH Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.H.S.Dahiya, Advocate. versus UOI & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Barkha Babbar, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HONBLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. The writ petitioner was issued a charge memorandum on April 29, 1996 listing two charges against him. The first charge was of using insulting, uncivilized and threatening language against SI/Ex.Poonam Dutta on being detailed for second shift night duty on April 18/19, 1996. Second article of charge, which in fact is not a charge, was that thrice in the past the petitioner had been punished for indiscipline.2. It is apparent that it was charge No.1 which had to be looked into for adjudication of facts. As regards charge No.2, service record would have sufficed, and in respect thereof we note that as per the testimony of PW-11...
Dr. Ajit Kr. Nag Vs. M.M.T.C. Ltd and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4695/1997 % Judgment reserved on:25. h July, 2012 Judgment delivered on:20th November, 2012 DR. AJIT KR. NAG ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Soumyadip Pani, Adv. versus M.M.T.C. LTD & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Rajinder Dhawan and Mr. B.S. Rana, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. Vide the instant petition petitioner is seeking relief as under: i) Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay Rs.9,50,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Fifty thousand only) along with interest @ 18% per annum in lieu of the benefits and dues to the petitioner. ii) Declare that the resignation of the petitioner is deemed to have taken effect from 29.11.1996 and or / 02.01.1997; and that the petitioner ceases to be an employee of the respondent corporation from the respective dates.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner was selected as Economic Advisor by respondent...
Emco Limited Vs. Malvika Steel Limited and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % CS(OS) 1252/2000 20th November, 2012 EMCO LIMITED Through: ......Plaintiff Mr. Jay Savla, Advocate. VERSUS MALVIKA STEEL LIMITED & ORS. ...... Defendants Through: Mr. P.S. Bindra, Advocate with Mr. Ketan Madan, Advocate for defendant No.2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The subject suit has been filed by the plaintiff-company M/s. EMCO Limited for declaration and permanent injunction. Though there are three defendants in the suit, the relief of injunction is claimed against the defendant No.2 for preventing it from encashing the bank guarantee issued by the defendant No.3Dena Bank. The bank guarantee was issued on the request of the defendant No.1 by the defendant No.3 and of which the defendant No. 2 is the beneficiary.2. The facts of the case are that the defendant No.1 placed a purchase order upon the plaintiff for supply of various transformers. The purchase ...
Navneet Singh Anand Vs. Naveen Sareen and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:20. 11.2012 CS(OS) 1448/2012 NAVNEET SINGH ANAND Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. Ashish Aggarwal and Mr. Varun Sharma, Advocates versus NAVEEN SAREEN & ORS Through: ..... Defendant Mr. Ajay Digpaul and Ms. Arti Bansal, Advocates for the applicant in IA No.13060/2012. Ms. Hetu Arora Sethi, Adv. for D-1 to 3. And + CS(OS) 1449/2012 NAVNEET SINGH ANAND Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. Ashish Aggarwal and Mr. Varun Sharma, Advocates versus NARESH KUMAR SAREEN & ANR Through: ..... Defendant Mr. Ajay Digpaul and Ms. Arti Bansal, Advocates for the applicant in IA No.13072/2012. Ms. Hetu Arora Sethi, Adv. for D-1 to 2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(ORAL) IA No.13060/2012 (under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC) in CS(OS) 1448/2012 And IA No.13072/2012 (under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC) in CS(OS) 1449/2012 CS(OS) No.1448/2012 is a suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell alleged to have been executed by Shri Madan Lal...
Paramjit Singh Chopra and ors. Vs. M/S. Maples Corporate Services Pvt. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 3018/2011 PARAMJIT SINGH CHOPRA AND ORS. Through: Mr. Bhuvan Gugnani versus ..... Plaintiffs M/S. MAPLES CORPORATE SERVICES PVT. LTD. AND ORS. .... Defendants Through: None % Date of Decision : November 20, 2012 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL JUDGMENT : REVA KHETRAPAL, J.1. The plaintiffs have filed the present suit for recovery of possession, arrears of rent and grant of mesne profits/damages in respect of immovable property bearing No. 1112-A, Chiranjiv Tower, 43 Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019 admeasuring 636 square feet, more particularly shown in red in the site plan annexed with the plaint.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present suit are as follows. The plaintiffs as the owners of the aforesaid immovable property, on 16.07.2009, executed a registered Lease Deed in favour of the defendant No.1 for a period of 3 years commencing from 04.06.2009 to 03.06.2012 at the rent of ` 63,600/- per month, apart from s...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Enchante Jewellery Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:20. h November, 2012 + ITA 1006/2011 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N. P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus ENCHANTE JEWELLERY LTD. Through: .......Respondent Mr. P. Roy Chaudhary, Advocate. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J: (OPEN COURT) The Revenue in this appeal, challenges the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT, for short) dated 25.11.2010 in ITA No.2642/Del/2005, urges that the following questions of law arise for consideration:1. Whether the ITAT fell into error in not sustaining the disallowance of Rs.1,04,00,000/- since the same was of a penal nature? 2. Whether the Tribunal fell into error in deleting the disallowance of Rs.12,37,200/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 43B(e) in the facts and circumstances of the case? 2. The facts are that the assessee used to manufacture and trade in gold jewellery. Its return for the ass...
S. Avtar Singh Vs. State of Nct of Delhi and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
#30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3940/2012 & CRL.M.A. 18919/2012 S. AVTAR SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Rajiv Shukla, Advocate versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents Through Ms. Jasbir Kaur, APP for State Date of Decision :20. h November, 2012 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J : (ORAL) 1. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr. P.C. seeking quashing of complaint case being CC No. 1041/2002 (New No. 42/2005) pending before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Special Acts), Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi filed by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short SEBI) on the ground that same was not maintainable in accordance with Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956.2. Mr. Rajiv Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the alleged offence was committed on 12th July, 2002 when SEBI issued a letter directing M/s. G.P. Forest Development India Ltd. (hereinafter referred ...
Pacific Garments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 286/2010 PACIFIC GARMENTS PVT. LTD. Through: ..... Petitioner Mrs. Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate. versus ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa. Advocate. % Date of Decision : November 20, 2012 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL JUDGMENT : REVA KHETRAPAL, J.1. The aforesaid petition has been filed by M/s Pacific Garments Pvt. Ltd. for appointment of an Arbitrator under Section 11of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. Shorn of details, the facts are that a fire accident occurred on 22.04.2008 in the factory of the petitioner, in which huge stocks of raw and finished materials were lost, apart from the massive and enormous damage to the building. A claim was lodged by the petitioner with the respondent for Rs.4,46,61,615/-. After the lodging of the said insurance claim and exchange of various letters between the parties, the respondent M/s Oriental In...
AshvIn Chadha Vs. University of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-20-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No. 497/2012 Judgment reserved on :24. h July, 2012 Judgment delivered on:20. h November ,2012 % ASHVIN CHADHA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Amit Sethi, Mr. Ishan Khanna and Ms. Preeti Gupta, Advs. Versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Dhruv Mehta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mohinder Rupal and Mr. Sriram Krishna, Advs. for R1. Mr. Amitesh Kumar and Mr. Sudhanshu Shekhar, Advs. for Respondent No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:a) W.P.(C) No.497/2012 Issue appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of writ of certiorari thereby declaring that the very appointment of respondent No.2 as OSD by respondent No. 1 is illegal, unwarranted, unlawful, arbitrary and is violative of Ordinance XVIII Clause 7 (3)(c). Page 1 of 38 b) Issue appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of writ of certi...
- ‹ Prev
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- Next ›
- Last »