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.
National Highways Authority of India Vs. Hindustan Construction Compan ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2012
R-3. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision:08. 11.2012 % FAO (OS) No. 48/2012 NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Ms.Padma Priya, Ms. Meenakshi Sood and Ms. Preeti Gupta, Advocates versus HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Pravin H Parekh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sameer Parekh, Mr. D.P. Mohanty, Mr. Vishal Prasad, Ms.Ritika Sethi and Ms. Suman Yadav, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.(ORAL) 1. A contract was awarded by the appellant to the respondent/contractor for construction of the Allahabad by-pass project in U.P. vide agreement dated 02.06.2004. The project stands completed. However, certain disputes arose inter se the parties qua different aspects of the contract and in view of the arbitration clause, the same were referred to arbitration. We may note that the appellant has a Dispute Resolution Board (DR...
M.A. Beg Vs. Union of India, Through Its Secretary, Ministry of Inform ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2012
G. George Paracken: This Original Application has been filed by the applicant aggrieved by the Annexure A-5 Office Order dated 27.10.2003 wherein it has been stated that consequent upon the revocation of his suspension by the Ist respondent, namely, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting vide its order dated 06.10.2003, he assumed the post of Producer Grade-II in the officer of the 2nd Respondent, namely, the Directorate General, Doordarshan, w.e.f. 08.10.2003. 2. The facts of this case are that while working as Producer Grade-II in substantive capacity, the applicant was promoted to the post of Assistant Controller of Programmes (`ACP for short) on 28.06.1999 on ad hoc basis along with other similarly placed persons purely on administrative requirement. While continuing in the said post, he was placed under suspension with effect from 05.01.2002, due to his alleged involvement in a criminal case. However, according to him, his order of suspension was revoked w.e.f. 06.10.2003 an...
Ugc Research Scientist Association Vs. Prof. S. Thorat : the Chairman, ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2012
Dr. Dharam Paul Sharma, Member (J): In this Review Application, the Review Applicants seeks review of the orders dated 15.9.2010 and 1.11.2010 passed in CP 568/2010 and MA 2584/2010 respectively. The review applicants have further prayed for directions to the respondents to the following effect:- a. the order dated 5.1.2010 is to be implemented in its totality and ensuring benefits to be granted to all Research Scientists who were in employment at the time of presentation and filing of OA 919/2004 without exception; b. the outcome to which the implementation can be made subject to is merely a Writ Petition, if any, filed by the Respondent and not to any clarification/ sanction/ direction from the HRD Ministry as the same would be in violation of the orders dated 5.1.2010; c. to issue a fresh circular clearly incorporating the above directions - as also suggested in the proforma circular Annexure B; d. The words ,though may be subject to the outcome, occurring at the end of para 5 of t...
Sh. Lalit Kumar Vs. Union of India Through Secretary, Ministry of Home ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Nov-08-2012
(Oral) G. George Paracken: The respondents have issued an advertisement published in the employment news on 2-8 June, 2012 for filling up 752 posts of Constable (Driver) in Delhi Police. The applicant has also applied for the said post. One of the requirements in the advertisement was that they should pass the physical endurance test of 1600 mtrs. race; for persons upto the age of 30 years within 7 minutes, for persons from 30 to 40 years within 8 minutes and for those above 40 years of age within 9 minutes. The applicant belongs to the second category. 2. According to him, he has practiced to participate in the aforesaid test and to finish the race within 8 minutes. However, when the candidates gathered for participating in the test there was a public announcement that the time has been reduced by one minute in each case. In other words, the applicants had to complete the race in 7 minutes instead of 8 minutes. The applicant has made an allegation that some of the candidates have been...
Rashid Vs. State Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Crl.M.C.N0. 2247/2012 Date of Decision:7. h November, 2012 + # ! RASHID ....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shailendra Bhardwaj, Advocate Versus $ * STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..Respondents Through: Mr. M.N. Dudeja, APP for the State Mr. Abdul Salam, Adv. for R-2 & 3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K.BHASIN ORDER P.K.BHASIN, J: The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 29th May, 2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby anticipatory bail was granted to respondents no. 2 and 3 who are his father-in-law and brother-in-law respectively and who had caused firearm injuries to him on 13th May, 2012. The petitioner-injured has thus filed the present petition under Section 439(2) read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for setting aside the said order of the Sessions Court.2. The learned Sessions Judge granted anticipatory bail to respondents 2 and 3 rejecting the States opposition on the grounds that the of...
Bhaskar Refractories and Sw Pipes Private Limited Vs. ---------------- ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Judgment:07.11.2012 COMPANY PETITION NO. 334 OF 201.BHASKAR REFRACTORIES AND SW PIPES PRIVATE LIMITED . Demerged Company AND B N B S CEMENTS AND PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED ...................Resultant Company Through Mr. Mukesh Sukhija, Advocate for the Petitioners Mr. K.S. Pradhan, Deputy Registrar of Companies for the Regional Director Mr. Rajiv Bahl, Advocate for the Official Liquidator CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(Oral) 1 This joint Petition has been filed under sections 391(2) & 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 by the Petitioner Demerged Company and Resultant Company seeking sanction of the Scheme of Arrangement of Demerger of Estate Division of BHASKAR REFRACTORIES AND SW PIPES PRIVATE LIMITED (Demerged Company); into B N B S CEMENTS AND PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED (Resultant Company). 2 The registered offices of the Petitioner Demerged Company and Resultant Company are situated at New Delhi, within th...
National thermal Power Corporation Ltd Vs. Siemens Atiengesellschaft
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:30. 10.2012 Date of Decision:07. 11.2012 + CM No. 14904/2012 IN FAO(OS) No. 372/2012 NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Dushyant Dave, Sr.Adv. with Ms.Sangeeta Bharti, Mr.Anukul Raj and Ms.Shweta Mishra, Advs. Versus SIEMENS ATIENGESELLSCHAFT ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Dipankar Gupta, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Anil Bhatnagar, Mr.Amit Dhingra and Mr.Aman Leekha, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.1. The dispute inter se the parties arises from the contract awarded by the appellant to the respondent for Gas Based Combined Cycle Power Project at Dadri, Uttar Pradesh on 30.09.1989 for which the contract was entered into on 06.12.1989. The project was to be constructed in two stages. The project was delayed by a period of 55 months.2. It is the case of the respondent that there was delay on the part of the appellant in opening the letters of c...
Union of India Vs. B.S.Bola
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:07. 11.2012 W.P.(C) 4684/2011 UNION OF INDIA ..... Petitioner versus B.S.BOLA ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr D.S.Mehandru. For the Respondent : Mr A.K.Behera. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 22.12.2010 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. No.1595/2010.2. The question which came up for consideration before the Tribunal was whether the respondents case for grant of Junior Administrative Grade-I, which was available to the officers of DANIPS (Delhi, Andaman & Nicobar Islands Police Service) w.e.f. 01.01.1996, could be placed in a sealed cover by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) convened on 15.10.2009, when the officers junior to him were granted the same grade from that date (01.01.1...
Tofa Devi and ors. Vs. Bablu Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
$~ 39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:7. h November, 2012 + MAC. APP. 1175/2012 TOFA DEVI & ORS. Through ..... Appellants Mr. Sanjeev Srivastava, Advocate versus BABLU SINGH & ORS. Through ..... Respondents Ms.Neerja Sachdeva, Advocate for the Respondent No.3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The present Appeal is allowed in terms of the judgment passed today in MAC.APP.525/2012 titled HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. TOFA DEVI & ORS.2. For detailed order, please see the above mentioned judgment. (G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE NOVEMBER 07 2012 pst...
Pacific Spirits (P) Ltd. Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-07-2012
$~ 44 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:7. h November, 2012 + CM(M). 1217/2012 PACIFIC SPIRITS (P) LTD. Through ..... Petitioner Mr.Jaswinder Singh, Advocate versus PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ORS. Through None ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) CM. No.18985/2012 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. CM(M). 1217/2012 & CM.18984/2012 1. By an order dated 12.10.2012 in S.A.109/2011, I.A. No.829/2012 was disposed of by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I whereby the Petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of `1 Crore within one week and a further sum of `5 Crores within 21 days. The Petitioner was further directed to file an affidavit-cum-undertaking in this regard by 17.10.2012. The relevant portion of the order dated 12.10.2012 is extracted hereunder: I am of the view that there is no cogent reason to stop the bank from taking possession of the property, as the applicants had ...
- ‹ Prev
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- Next ›
- Last »