Delhi Court March 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.
Abhinav Jindal Vs. State and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
1. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner has sought to set aside the Order on Charge dated 30.05.2011 passed by learned ACMM, Rohini, New Delhi whereby the ld. ACMM has directed framing of Charge under Sections 420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1861 against the petitioner and Charge dated 30.05.2011 framed by ld. ACMM, Rohini, New Delhi in case FIR No. 375/05 under Section 420 of the IPC and under Section 61/1/14 of the Excise Act registered at PS Shalimar Bagh titled State v. Abhinav Jindal and proceedings emanating therefrom. 2. The facts of the instant case, in brief, are that the petitioner is the Proprietor of a liquor vend named Abhinav Jindal Wine Shop (hereinafter referred to as “the Vend”) situated at 2, 3, 4 and 5, Arcade Place, CSC, BN Block, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi and is the holder of Licence in Form L-52 for the retail sale of various brands of Indian Made Foreign Liquor /Beer as approved or registered by the statutory authority in the National Capital Te...
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd Vs. Chander Sekhar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. 1. This Intra-Court appeal impugns the judgment dated 03.05.2010 of the learned Single Judge dismissing W.P.(C) No.2946/2010 preferred by the appellant. The said writ petition was preferred impugning the order dated 10.11.2009 of the Central Information Commission (CIC) allowing the appeal filed by the respondent and directing the appellant to disclose the information sought. 2. The appellant had floated a tender titled „GSM Phase-VI‟for the installation of 93 million GSM lines in four parts. M/s KEC International Ltd. was one of the bidders in the said tender. The respondent, claiming to be one of the shareholders of the said KEC International Ltd., on 02.07.2009 applied under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 seeking the following information: “a. Copy of the complete Report of Evaluation of Tender on the Financial Bids received from various bidders against Part 3 of Tender No. IMPCS/PHASE VI/WZ/CGMT-MH/2008-09/1 dated 01.05...
Aman Bhatia Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
SURESH KAIT, J. 1. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner has sought to set aside/ quash the FIR No.62/2003 registered with police station Anti-Corruption Branch under Section 7/13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred as 'PoC Act') and Section 69 of the Stamp Act. Also sought quashing the criminal proceedings including the summoning order dated 25.01.2006 and order on charge and formal charge framed against the petitioner vide order dated 02.06.2008 in case titled ‘State v. Aman Bhatia’ by learned Special Judge, Delhi. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that vide aforementioned FIR dated 09.12.2003 case for the offence punishable under Section 7/13 PoC Act was registered at police station A.C. Branch against the petitioner. 3. Vide order dated 02.06.2008 formal charges were framed against him under the offences mentioned above. 4. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed a Criminal Revision Petition No.510/2008 before this Court again...
Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Damyanti Verma (Decd.) Through ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. 1. These Intra-Court appeals impugn the common judgment dated 25th July, 2011 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 4342/2007, W.P.(C) No. 4344/2007, W.P.(C) No. 13393/2009 and W.P.(C) No. 13628/2009 preferred by the respondents herein. Of the said four writ petitions, two i.e. W.P.(C) No. 4342/2007 and W.P.(C) No. 4344/2007 were filed impugning the common judgment dated 22nd May, 2007 of the learned District Judge [exercising powers under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971] and dismissing the appeals preferred by the respondents against the order dated 18th April, 2006 of the Estate Officer of eviction of the respondents from Flat No.14/12190 and Flat No.7/10181 on the first floor of Tropical Building, H- Block, Connaught Circus, New Delhi. The other two writ petitions i.e. W.P.(C) No. 13393/2009 and W.P.(C) No.13628/2009 were preferred assailing the common judgment dated 29th October, 2009 of the learned Distri...
Govt. of Nct of Delhi and Others Vs. New Variety Tent House and Anothe ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. 1. This Intra-Court appeal impugns the order dated 23rd March, 2010 of the learned Single Judge allowing W.P.(C) No.7225/2007 preferred by the respondents and consequently directing the appellants to release a sum of Rs.67,57,072/- to the respondents; the appellants have also been burdened with interest @ Rs.10% per annum for delay in payment and with costs. Notice of this appeal was issued and the operation of the impugned order stayed. The writ record has also been requisitioned. The counsels have been heard. 2. The respondents had filed the writ petition pleading, that they were / are engaged in the business of supplying tents / tin sheds and other furniture on hire; that in the years 1998 to 2000, the Directorate of Education of the appellants had placed an order on the respondents for erection of tin shed structures in some of the government schools in Delhi; similar orders were placed on other tent houses also including one Punjabi Tent House; that during ...
M.A. Rashid Vs. Gopal Chandra and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-23-2012
M.L. MEHTA, J. 1. The petitioner is accused under section 448/ 506 IPC and Section 3(1) (v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). Vide these petitions, the petitioner prays for quashing of the complaint No. 2052/2006 as also the summoning order dated 1.10.2008 of M.M. and order dated 28.1.2009 of the learned ASJ. 2. The petitioner at the relevant time was posted as Chief Manager of Corporation Bank. This bank had advanced a housing loan of Rs.5 lac to Mrs. and Mr. M.S. Sidhu for purchase of a flat. The borrowers as a security for the loan had deposited the title deeds of the said flat by way of equitable mortgage. As they failed to repay the loan, the account of Mr. M.S. Sidhu was declared NPA on 6.3.2004, whereupon a notice under Section 13(2) and 13(13) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short the “SARFAESI...
D R Parihar S/O Late Shri B R Parihar and Others Vs. Union of India an ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-2012
Shri M.L. Chauhan: The applicants have filed this OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: “(i) Grant the promotion to the grade of Dy. Controller of Accounts w.e.f 01.04.2008 retrospectively from the date on which, the applicant become eligible with all financial benefits in terms of arrears of pay and allowances and consequential benefits; (ii) To award costs in favour of the applicant; (iii) May also pass any further order(s), direction(s) as be deemed just and proper to meet the ends of justice.” 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case, as projected by the applicants, are that consequent upon the induction in the Indian Civil Accounts Service (ICAS), they were placed in ICAS batch 2004. Subsequently, the applicants were given the Junior Time Scale of Rs.8000-275-13500 and were posted as Assistant Controller of Accounts vide impugned office order dated 31.7.2007. It is further pleaded in the OA that the employees, who were granted Junior Time Scale, ...
Daya Ram and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-2012
ORAL: MRS. MEERA CHHIBBER, MEMBER (J) 1. Applicants, numbering six, have filed this OA claiming the following relief:- “8.1 That this Hon’ble Tribunal in the interest of justice may be graciously pleased to allow this application and direct the respondents to extend the benefit of the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of andhra Pradesh as well as the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Chander Pal and Ors. V/s Union of India and Ors and Chhottan Prasad and Ors V/s Union of India and Ors and take into consideration full period of temporary status for the purpose of working of qualifying service and 50% period working before acquisition of temporary status. 8.2 That the Hon’ble Tribunal may also be pleased to award any other or further relief which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. 8.3 That the cost of these proceedings may kindly be granted in favour of Applicants”. 2. It is submitte...
Suresh Chand Meena Vs. Union of India Through Secretary Ministry of Cu ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-2012
Dr. Dharam Paul Sharma, Member (J) The applicant, a Senior Horticultural Assistant in the Office of Respondent-Archaeological Survey of India and posted in Chittorgarh, Rajasthan has filed this application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following reliefs:- “i) to quash and set aside the impugned orders dated 20.10.2009 (Annexure A-1), seniority list dated 11.11.2009 (Annexure A-1/A) and the order dated 16.2.2010 (Annexure A-2) and direct the official respondents to place the Respondent No.4 below the applicant in the seniority list dated 11.11.2009 in terms of the order dated 25.8.2008 or alternatively, the respondents be directed to place the applicant at par with respondent no.4 i.e. consider the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of Senior Horticultural Assistant w.e.f. 26.12.2000 and if the applicant is found fit, he may be promoted with all consequential benefits like salary, seniority etc; ii) to pass such other and furt...
M/S. L.N.M. Auto Industries Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ce, Delhi-iv
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-22-2012
PER: D.N. PANDA, J. 1. The appeal involves 2 disputes. One is against levy of interest of Rs.70,461/- as against duty demand of Rs.1,20,902/- and second dispute is whether additional customs duty of Rs.1,30,024/- is payable from DEPB account. Shri Handa fairly states that as against the interest demand, Rs.30,000/- has been deposited and rest of the interest shall be deposited by the appellant. In respect of the second dispute his submission is that when there was no denial in law to discharge additional customs duty liability from DEPB account, that cannot be forced to be discharged by cash. The DEPB account was debited on 4.1.03 and 6.2.03 for aggregate amount of Rs.1,30,024/-. Appellant’s stand was supported by decisions of the Tribunal made on 25.11.2002 and 5.12.02. But such favourable decision could not sustain by a Larger Bench decision made against assessee on 16.8.04. Audit was done to the appellant’s factory on 20th and 21st May, 2004 which gave rise to the allega...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »