Delhi Court December 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.
M/S Ahuja Masala Company (P) Ltd. Vs. Government of Nct of Delhi and o ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:14. h December, 2012 % + LPA No.789/2012 M/S AHUJA MASALA COMPANY (P) LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. H.M. Singh & Ms. Shabana, Advs. Versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Ruchi Sindhwani & Ms. Bandana Shukla, Advs. for R-1&2. Ms. Anusuya Salwan & Ms. Renuka Arora, Advs. for R-3. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.The appeal impugns the judgment dated 19.10.2012 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.10625/2009 filed by the appellant (seeking a direction to the respondents to allot a plot of land ad-measuring 200 sq. mtrs. to the appellant), to the extent it directs allotment to the appellant of a plot ad-measuring 150 sq. mtrs. only. The appellant contends that it is entitled to a plot of 200 sq. mtrs. size as sought in the writ petition.2. The counsels for the respondents appear on advance notice and we have heard the appeal final...
Mukesh Kumar Sharma Vs. Uoi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 318/2012 and CM No.671/2012 Date of decision:14. h December, 2012 % MUKESH KUMAR SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Adv. versus UOI AND ORS Through : ..... Respondents Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, Adv. for Mr. B.V. Niren, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA GITA MITTAL, J.(Oral) 1. The petitioner has assailed the signal dated 1 st December, 2012 issued by the respondents informing him that the summary proceedings initiated against him have been set aside by the competent authority with further directions for holding a General Force Court against the petitioner. The petitioner also assails the signal dated 14th December, 2011 sent by the respondents stating that the petitioners trial was tentatively scheduled in the second week of January, 2012.2. The respondents purported to have exercised jurisdiction under the Indo Tibetan Border Police Force Act, 1992 (ITBPF Act, 1992) and the rule...
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Deepak Rao and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:14. h December, 2012 + MAC.APP. 666/2012 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. ...... Appellant Through: Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa, Adv. versus DEEPAK RAO & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appellant Oriental Insurance Company Limited impugns a judgment dated 24.02.2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) in a Petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (the Act) preferred by the Respondents No.1 and 2.2. There is twin challenge to the judgment. First, the liability towards the pillion rider is not covered by the Insurance Policy obtained by the insured; and second, the compensation awarded is more than what is provided under the Second Schedule.3. It is urged that in case of a Petition under Section 163-A of the Act, the compensation has to be strictly in accordance with the second Schedule.4. As far as the fir...
Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Bilkish and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:14. h December, 2012 + MAC.APP. 334/2011 RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD...... Appellant Through: Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Adv. versus SMT. BILKISH & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Anshuman Bal, Adv. for R-1 & R-2. Mr. D.K. Pandey, Adv. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. This Appeal is directed against a judgment dated 30.11.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (the Claims Tribunal) whereby a compensation of `3,75,000/- was awarded for the death of Shahrukh, a minor aged 17 years in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 22.06.2010.2. The quantum of compensation awarded is not challenged by Respondents No.1 and 2 who were the Claimants before the Claims Tribunal.3. The only ground of challenge raised in the instant Appeal is that the deceased Shahrukh was riding on a two wheeler along with two other persons. Thus, he himself was negligent in causing the acc...
Vinay Kumar Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: December 14, 2012 + WP(C) 7651/2012 VINAY KUMAR ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Anuj Agarwal, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Ravinder Agarwal, Advocate with Mr.Amit Yadav and Mr.Satya Prakash, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) CM No.19369/2012 (Exemption) Allowed; subject to all just exceptions. WP(C) No.7651/2012 1. One set counter affidavit filed is taken on record.2. On February 5, 2011, the Staff Selection Commission published an advertisement inviting applications from eligible candidates to be recruited as Constable (G.D.) in BSF, CISF, CRPF and SSB, and for reference we would refer to the same as Constable (G.D.) 2011 Recruitment.3. The advertisement indicated to the candidates that they would have to clear a written examination and those who qualify therein would have to clear a Physical Effic...
Krishan Kumar Vs. Delhi Jal Board
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P. (C) No. 669/2012 Reserved on:7. h September, 2012 Decided on:14. h December , 2012 KRISHAN KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Mr. Saqib Ali, Advs. versus DELHI JAL BOARD Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sumeet Pushkarna, CGSC with Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Adv. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 By the present petition the Petitioner seeks setting aside of the award dated 6th September, 2011 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Delhi in industrial dispute (ID) No. 332/2011 wherein the learned Tribunal held that the punishment of withholding of promotion of the workman for a period of 2 years as imposed by the Respondent was illegal and unjustified. However, it refused to grant him any relief on the ground that the case was barred by delay and laches.2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that the learned Tribunal erred in holding that the claim of Petitioner was barred by delay and laches. P...
Kalu @ Saleem Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
$~17/18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 1431/2011 Decided on 14th December, 2012 KALU @ SALEEM ..... Appellant Through :Mr. K. Singhal and Mr. Siddharth Mittal, Advs. Versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP AND + CRL.A. 1306/2010 SONU ..... Appellant Through :Mr. A.J.Bhambhani and Ms. Lakshita Sethi, Advs. Versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K.PATHAK, J.(ORAL) 1. Arguments heard. Trial court record perused.2. The only point canvassed during the course of hearing is that the ingredients of offence under Section 397 IPC are not attracted against the appellants, who have been convicted under Sections 120-B, 395 and 397 IPC. During the course of hearing, conviction of the appellants under Sections 120-B and 395 IPC has not been assailed on merits.3. In brief, prosecution case, as set out in the charge-sheet, is that victim Ashok Kumar was going with his servant Raj Kumar in a Santro ...
Prabhu Lal Vs. Uoi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:14. 12.2012 W.P.(C) 667/2012 & CM 1449/2012 PRABHU LAL ... Petitioner versus UOI AND ORS ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner For the Respondent No.1 For the Respondent No.2 : Ms Deepali Gupta : Mr Prasouk Jain for Mr B.V. Niren : Mr V. P. Uppal CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 21.10.2011 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in OA 964/2011.2. We need not go into the details of the controversy and we only need to examine the claim of the petitioner with regard to the commutation of pension that the petitioner had sought prior to his retirement as also the date from which the deductions would be deemed to take effect from.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner initially submitted that her case fell within provisos...
Suresh Chand Vs. the Commissioner of Police and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:14. 12.2012 W.P.(C) 1313/2012 GOPAL SINGH ..... Petitioner versus THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS ..... Respondents WITH W.P.(C) 3028/2012 KISHAN PAL SINGH ..... Petitioner versus THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS ..... Respondents AND W.P.(C) 1465/2012 SURESH CHAND ..... Petitioner versus THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in these cases: For the Petitioners : Mr O.P. Khadaria in W.P.(C) 1313/2012 Mr Mohd Shah Nawaz Hasan in W.P.(C) 3028/2012 Mr K. Venkatraman in W.P.(C) 1465/2012 For the Respondent : Ms Zubeda Begum in W.P.(C) 1313/2012 Ms Shariq Mohd for R-1 to R-3 in W.P.(C) 3028/2012 Mr Mohd Noorullah for Mr Anjum Javed in W.P.(C) 1465/2012 CORAM: HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.1. These three writ petitions, namely WP(C) 1313/2012, WP(C) 3028/2012 and WP(C) 1465/2012, emerge out of a common impugned order dated ...
Mohd. Iqbal and ors Vs. Mst. Najma and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-2012
* HIGH COURT OF DEL1HI: NEW DELHI % Judgment Pronounced on: December 14, 2012 + CS (OS) No.572/1990 MOHD.IQBAL & ORS Through ..... Plaintiffs Mr. Aly Mirza, Adv. with Mr. Niloy Das Gupta, Adv. Versus MST.NAJMA & ORS ..... Defendants Through Mr. S.D.Ansari, Adv. with Mr. I.Ahmed, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The present suit has been filed by four plaintiffs seeking following reliefs: (a) A declaratory decree be passed in favour of the plaintiffs against the defendants to the effect that the plaintiffs and defendants No.4 & 5 being the only legal heirs of the late Mohd.Ahmed are entitled to this estate; (b) In the alternative, in case it is held by the Honble Court that the defendants No.1 to 3 are also the legal heirs of the late Mohd.Ahmed, then a declaratory decree be passed to the effect that the plaintiffs and the defendants being the legal heirs of Mohd.Ahmed deceased are entitled to succeed to his estate in the shares provided by Muslim Law ...
- ‹ Prev
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- Next ›
- Last »