Delhi Court February 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.
Firasat and ors Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-07-2012
$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C.457/2012 % Judgment delivered on:07th February, 2012 FIRASAT and ORS ..... Petitioners Through : Mr.Javed Khan, Adv. versus STATE and ANR ..... Respondents Through : Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State Mr. D.K. Singh, Adv.for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral) Crl. M.A. 1585/2012 Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C.457/2012.1. Notice..2. Ld. APP accepts notice on behalf of the State..3. Ld. Counsel for respondent No.2, Mr. D.K. Singh accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2..4. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing. Crl.M.C.No.457/2012 Page 1 of 4.5. Vide the instant petition, the petitioners have sought to quash FIR No. 103/2009 registered at PS Welcome, Delhi under Section 406/498-A/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and the proceedings pending before the trial court..6. Ld. Counse...
Balwan Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-07-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL. REV. P. 422/2009 % Reserved on: 24th January , 2012 Decided on: 7th February, 2012 BALWAN SINGH ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Pushpender Singh Dahiya, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Manoj Ohri, APP for the State Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA.1. By the present petition the Petitioner seeks setting aside of the order dated 13th March, 2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge upholding the order of conviction of the Petitioner passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate under Sections 304A, 279 and 338 IPC. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate vide order dated 29th November, 2007 had sentenced the Petitioner to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of six months for offence punishable under Section 279 IPC and a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo Simple Imprisonment for two months and Rigorous Imprisonment for two years and Rs. 5000/- fine under Section 304A IPC, ...
Cit Vs. Virtual Soft Systems Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-07-2012
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: 10.01.2012 % Judgment delivered on: 07.02.2012 + ITA Nos. 216/2011, 398/2011, 403/2011, 404/2011 and 680/2011 CIT ...... APPELLANT Vs VIRTUAL SOFT SYSTEMS LTD. ..... RESPONDENT Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. S. Krishnan, Advocate CORAM :- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.1. The captioned appeals lay challenge to a common judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, New Delhi (in short the Tribunal) passed on 19.02.2010. The only point raised in the captioned appeals is: whether an assesses leased rental income could be allowed to be reduced by taking recourse to lease equalization charges..2. It is relevant to note that before the Tribunal the assessment years (in short AY) in issue were: AYs 1996-97 to 2000-01. Thus, the Tribunal, by virtue of the impugned judgment dealt in all ...
Mrs. Manju Bhargava Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-07-2012
ORAL: M.L. Chauhan: 1. The applicant has filed the present OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: “(A) Allow this Original Application with cost; (B) Issue appropriate direction or directions, order or orders; (i) Declaring the applicant entitled to get the 2nd A.C.P. on having completed 24 years of service by the applicant as on 4th Nov. 2000 in term of the Govt. of India, Department of Personnel and Training OM No.35034/1/97-Estt(D) dated 9th Aug. 1999; (ii) Directing the respondents to grant 2nd ACP to the applicant in terms of Govt. of India, Department of Per and Trg. OM No.25034/1/97-Estt(D) dated 9th Aug. 1999, w.e.f. 4th Nov.2000. (iii) Directing the respondents to implement 2nd A.C.P. to the applicant as per order of Govt. of NCT of Delhi Directorate of Education, ACP Cell dated 16th May 2008, w.e.f. 4th Nov. 2000. (C) Pass such other direction or directions, order or orders, as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice.̶...
Rajesh Kumar Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi Through Commissioner, ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-07-2012
Dr. Veena Chhotray, J. 1. The applicant had been working as a Muster Roll Safai Karamchari in IPP-VIII under the MCD. As per the averments in the OA, he had joined in that capacity in the year 2001.There is no averment before us about the applicant having worked continuously as a Muster Roll Worker. Vide the Respondents’ Order dated 26.8.2010 his name has been struck off from the roll call of MCD. This is on three-fold misconduct: (i) unauthorized absence from duty w.e.f. 22.4.2006 to 24.5.2006 and 2.8.2006 to 25.5.2007; (ii) as reported by MO I/C M/H Haiderpur on 18.1.2006 he was attending duties under the influence of alcohol and (iii) he misplaced the family planning register of M/H Haiderpur, IPP-VIII as reported by MO I/C M/H Haiderpur on 8.8.2005.On consideration of the reply to the Statements of Misconduct, the impugned decision has been taken by the Respondents. 2. By way of relief, the OA seeks directions for his reinstatement with full back wages and consequential monet...
Jhavnish Kumar Vs. Staff Selection Commission, Northern Region, Throug ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-07-2012
ORAL: M.L. Chauhan, Member (J). 1. Applicant has filed this OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: “(a) issue an appropriate order or direction directing respondent No.1, the Staff Selection Commission, North Region, New Delhi to conduct the interview of the applicant, for consideration of his appointment as Junior Engineer in the Central Public Works Department, after his successful performance in the interview, under the provisions of the Central Public Works Department (Subordinate Offices) Junior Engineer (Civil and Electrical) Recruitment Rules 2003; and (b) any other relief which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. (c) award costs:” 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that an advertisement was published in the Employment News for 22-28 December 2007 by the Staff Selection Commission regarding selection for the posts of Junior Engineer (Civil and Electrical) by way of an All India open competitive...
Sunil Kumar, Constable in Delhi Police Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and O ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-07-2012
Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A) 1. Shri Sunil Kumar, the applicant herein is aggrieved by (i) order dated 22.2.2011 (Annexure-A4) whereby he was inflicted the penalty of dismissal from service and his suspension period was treated as ‘period not spent on duty’; (ii) order dated 28.4.2011 (Annexure-A5) passed Appellate Authority in rejecting his appeal; (iii) the order dated 20.4.2007 (Annexure-A1) in which Departmental Enquiry (DE) was initiated; (iv) the summary of allegations available at Annexure-A2 and (v) the findings of the IO in his report dated 10.01.2006 (Annexure-A3) whereby the charge against him was held as proved. 2. The facts of the case in brief would disclose that while working as Constable in Delhi Police, he was found involved in a criminal case vide FIR No.35/04 dated 24.7.2004 U/s 718113 of Prevention of Corruption Act in P.S. AC Branch Delhi. He was convicted in the aforesaid case vide Trial Court judgment dated 16.2.2009.Earlier the DE was initiat...
Naresh Kumar Vs. Union of India Through Its Home Secretary, Ministry o ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-07-2012
V.K. Bali, Chairman, J. 1. The matter herein, which pertains to the year 2002, is indeed the oldest pending in this Tribunal. The interim orders passed from time would reflect the reasons as to why finalization of this case has been delayed, and need not be mentioned in this order, but for the one, which is relevant and to which we shall advert to hereinafter. Even though the Original Application was filed in the year 2002, it came to be amended on 04.08.2009.We may extract the bare minimum facts that may need necessary mention at this stage for the ultimate orders that we are going to pass, from the amended Application only. 2. The applicant is a Deputy Commissioner of Police rank officer on regular basis in the pay scale of Rs.14300-400-18300 of the Delhi, andamans and Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli Police Service (for short, DANILDDDNHPS).His willingness for appointment into Indian Police Service (IPS) was asked for in the Deputy Commissioner ...
D.N. Kumar Vs. Union of India Through, Secretary, Ministry of Home Aff ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-07-2012
1. Most of the facts relating to this case have been recorded in the order dated 18.10.2011. The grievance of the applicant is that although here tired from government service drawing pay scale meant for UDC, yet his pension was calculated on hypothetical basis treating his status as in the rank of LDC during his deputation period in National Textile Corporation (NTC) before his final absorption there, although he was drawing the salary applicable to a UDC before his deputation. The applicant, who was transferred to the surplus cell and working with the Settlement-Commissioner (Department of Rehabilitation) prior to his deputation to NTC accepted 100% commutation value of his pension determined on the basis of the calculation sheet given at page-66.The applicant has acquiesced in the calculation and did not raise any dispute while accepting 100% commutation value. However, consequent on acceptance of the recommendations of the Fifth Pay Commission, government decided that all the emplo...
Cce, Jaipur-i Vs. M/S Smilax Pharmaceuticals
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-07-2012
Per Mathew John, J. 1. The Respondents were manufacturers of Medicaments falling under Heading 30.03 of the Central Excise Tariff and availing exemption for small scale units issued from year to year vide Notification 8/98 CE dated 02-06-98, 8/99 CE dated 28-02-99 8/2000 dated 01-03-2000, 8/2001 dated 01-03-2001 and 8/2002 dated 01-03-2002. They were also manufacturing medicines under the brand-name of others for which they were paying duty without availing benefit under the above notification. 2. Under the SSI notification exemption is available for first clearances up to the aggregate value not exceeding Rs. One crore, in a financial year. For calculating this value limit of goods ...
- ‹ Prev
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- Next ›
- Last »