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.
Officer Also While Allowing the Vs. Unknown
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % CCP (CO.) NO.30/2010 IN CO.PET.NO. 75/2002 + Date of Decision: 6th February, 2012 In the matter of: # M/S KOSHIKA TELECOM LTD. (In liquidation) AND In the matter of Contempt petition under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act,1971 r/w Order XXXIX Rule 2- A and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure AGAINST $.1. Ms. Shalini Soni.2. IFCI Ltd..3. Mr. R.K.Bansal Appearances: Mr. Rajiv Bahl Adv. for Official Liquidator Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr.P.S Bindra,Adv. for Ms. Shalini Soni and IFCI Ltd. Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh,Adv. for Mr. R.K Bansal, Recovery Officer, DRT CORAM: * HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K.BHASIN ORDER P.K BHASIN, J: The official liquidator had filed this contempt petition against respondent-contemnor Ms. Shalini Soni, who is the Assistant General CCP (CO.) NO.30/2010 IN CO.PET.NO. 75/2002 Page 1 of 19 Manager (Law) of IFCI Ltd., for non-compliance of the order dated 08.10.2009 passed by this Court in Company P...
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Baijnath Dass and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 3rd January, 2011 Pronounced on: 6th February, 2012 + MAC.APP. 529/2005 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Pratik Datta, Adv. versus BAIJNATH DASS and ORS. .... Respondents Through: Mr. B. P. Sharma, Adv. for R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J. C.M. APPL. No.10963/2012 (for recalling of Order dated 20.04.2007) and C.M. APPL. No.10964/2012 (for stay).1. The Applicant (the fourth Respondent) prays for setting aside of the order dated 20.04.2007 and for rehearing of the Appeal on merits on the ground that the Applicant was getting treatment for brain tumor in Delhi and could not receive any notice issued by this Court. He was unaware of the Court proceedings. It is averred that in another matter (relating to this very accident in respect of other Claimants) a first Appeal was filed by the Applicant and the Appellant appeared as a Respondent in the Appeals No.113 and 121/2005. ...
Syed Nizam Ahmed Vs. Cbi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 1698/2011 and Crl.M.B.No.2109/2011 % Judgment reserved on : 24th January, 2012 Judgment delivered on: 06th February, 2012 SYED NIZAM AHMED ..... Petitioner Through : Mr.Vikas Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr.S.S.Mishra, Adv. versus CBI ..... Respondent Through : Mr.P.K. Sharma Standing Counsel with Mr.Uday Prakash Yadav, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J..1. In the instant petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 03.11.2011 whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge, Central District, Delhi dismissed the bail application of the petitioner..2. The facts of the instant case in brief are that vide FIR No.630/2006 dated 21.11.2006 by the Economic Offence Wing of Delhi Police at Sri Niwas Puri police station, has been registered under Section 406/409/ 420/ 120B Indian Penal Code, 1860. From the date of registration of the FIR, Look Out Circular (LOC) was opened against the petitioner so that he could ...
Vishal Sharma Vs. Directorate of Revenue
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on :11th November, 2011 Judgment delivered on: 06th February, 2012 + Crl.M.B.No.193/2011 in CRL.A. 148/2010 VISHAL SHARMA ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Yogesh K. Saxena, Adv. versus DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Adv. With + Crl.M.B.No.247/2010 in CRL.A. 190/2010 SOM NATH SHARMA ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Sanjiv Kumar, Adv. versus DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Adv. And + Crl.M.B.No.362/2010 in CRL.A. 284/2010 PURSHOTTAM LAL ..... Appellant Through : Mr.S.S. Das and Mr.Bhaskar Vali, Advs. versus Crl.M.Bs in Crl. A. Nos.148,190,284/2010 Page 1 of 9 DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J..1. Before stepping in the arena of factual matrix, it would be in place to mention here that by this common order, all the three...
Kashi Ram Vs. Uoi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2012
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI Reserved on : January 20, 2012 Pronounced on : February 06, 2012 + W.P. (C) No.5863/2002 and C.M. No. 9977/2002 % KASHI RAM ... Petitioner Through: Mr.L.R.Bhilware,Advocate versus UOI and ORS. ... Respondents Through: Mr. Som Dutt Kaushik, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR % ORDER 06.02.2012.1. In the year 1950, petitioner and his co-villagers had decided to start a High School in Village Ujjawa, Delhi and to run the said school the villagers had given some of their agricultural land to Dabur Educational Trust to augment the income which would be used for running the said school. Petitioner alongwith his co-owners had purportedly given 14 Bighas and 14 Biswas of agricultural land of Khasra No.606. in Village Dandsa, Delhi to the aforesaid Trust and according to the petitioner, the said school was taken over by Delhi Administration in the year 1952 but the petitioner who was living 10 kilometers away from the said school did not come to k...
Radhika Mehta Vs. Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2012
.* HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI Order decided on: 06.02.2012 + I.A. Nos.13107/10 and 9068/11 in CS (OS) No.2314 of 2009 RADHIKA MEHTA ..... Plaintiff Through Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. With Mr. Angad Mehta and Mr. Virendra Singh Thajur, Advs. versus PANASONIC INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Defendant Through Mr. Anil K. Kher, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Siddhartha Jain, Adv. for D-1. Mr. P.K. Mittal, Adv. for proposed defendant. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J..1. By this order I shall dispose of the two applications filed by the plaintiff in the instant suit for permanent injunction and damages against the defendant restraining the defendant from dealing with or making suppliers of Lumix range of digital still cameras and E-Cam range of Digital Video cameras in India to any third parties..2. I.A. No.13107/2010 has been filed by the plaintiff under Order I Rule 10 CPC seeking permission of this court to implead Panasonic Consumer I.A. Nos.131076/2010 and 9068/2011 in CS(OS) ...
Veena Monga Vs. Ravi Monga and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2012
.* HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI Order Announced on: 06.02.2012 + I.A. No.13559/2011 in CS (OS) No.1686/2010 VEENA MONGA ..... Plaintiff Through Mr. P.S. Patwalia, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sidhant Goel, Mr. Mohit Goel and Mr. Yawar Masood, Advs. Versus RAVI MONGA and ORS ..... Defendants Through Defendant No.1 in person. Mr. Sunil Mittal, Adv. with Mr. Rajesh Baweja and Mr. K. Mittal, Advs. for D-7 to.10. Mr. H.S. Kohli, Adv. for D-11. Mr. Parminder Singh, Adv. for D-12, 14 to.16. Mr. Vishal Bansal, Adv. for D-19. Mr. Nitin Kumar, proxy counsel for Mr. Siddharth Bambha, Adv. for D-23. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J..1. By this order, I propose to dispose of the application filed by defendant Nos.7-10 under Section 151 CPC, seeking permission to rent/lease out the property, bearing Shed No.3, Plot No.9/45, Kirti Nagar Industrial Area, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the "Shed No.3") in I.A. No.13559/2011 in CS(OS) No.1686/2010 Page No.1 of 6 the suit filed f...
State Vs. Sri Niwas Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2012
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3245/2009 Date of Decision:06.02.2012 STATE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Nitesh Rana with Mr. Tushar Sinha, Advocates. Ms Deepali, Adv. for investors. Ms Jasbir Kuar, APP Versus SRI NIWAS SHARMA ..... Respondent Through: Mr. M.C. Dhingra, Adv. And CRL.M.C. 3473/2008 and Crl.MA 12934/2008 A.K. GOVIL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Nitesh Rana and Mr. Tushar Sinha, Advocates. Versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI and ORS. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Akram Pasha, Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocates for Investors/ Interveners. Ms. Jasbir Kaur, APP for State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA M.L. MEHTA, J..1. The aforesaid petition being Crl.MC 3473 of 2008 is filed by the petitioner Mr. A.K. Govil under Section 482 Cr.PC for quashing the order dated 21.10.2008 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate in a criminal case being FIR No.213. of 2006 under Sections 420/406/120B IPC registered at Police Station Lodhi Colony, New Delhi. The other petiti...
Ms. Arti Lal Vs. Union of India Secretary to the Government of India a ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2012
Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A) 1. Ms. Arti Lal, the applicant herein, having been successful in the Civil Service Examination in the Year 2009 (CSE-2009) conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) in the Scheduled Caste (SC) category and secured 101st rank, has been selected to the Indian Administrative Service (IAS). Her grievance is that though she has indicated Uttar Pradesh (UP) as her home state, she has been allocated Gujarat State Cadre. Thus, impugning the Cadre Allocation Policy for the All India Service dated 10.08.2008, she has prayed for a direction from the Tribunal to the respondents to allocate her UP Cadre as Insider SC Officer. 2. In brief, the facts of the present OA are that the applicant applied for and wrote CSE 2009 as SC candidate. She was successful and ranked 101st and was appointed in the 2010 batch of IAS vide letter dated 18.08.2010 (Page-36). Shri Yogesh Kumar, the second respondent who also belongs to the SC category and has been selecte...
Tilak Raj, Ssa and Another Vs. Employees Provident Fund Organization M ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2012
Dr. A.K. Mishra, Member (A) 1. The applicants are aggrieved by the order dated 29.12.2009 (Annexure A/1(b) by which the representation of Applicant No.2 for grant of seniority in the grade of Social Security Assistance (SSA) was rejected on the ground that they had not been given exemption from passing the typing test which is required for their confirmation in the cadre of LDC. Their prayer is to set aside this order and to give a direction to the respondents to treat them as regularly appointed SSA with effect from 03.01.2004, a date from which similarly placed juniors have been given promotion. 2. The brief background of the case is as follows: The Applicants No.1 and 2 belong to SC category and were initially appointed on Group ‘D’ posts on 27.09.1989 and 21.10.1982 respectively. After clearing the departmental examination, they were both promoted on 04.11.1991 to the rank of LDC. The promotion order stipulated that they would not be entitled to confirmation and annual ...
- ‹ Prev
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- Next ›
- Last »