Delhi Court April 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.
Gaya Nath and Others Vs. the Commissioner Municipal Corporation of Del ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-16-2012
ORAL: M.L. Chauhan: MA 1042/2012 1. seeking joining together in a single petition is allowed. OA 1243/2012 The applicants have filed the present OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs:- “(i) Direct the respondents to fix the correct and proper pay scale as per 5th pay commission recommendation w.e.f. 01-01-1996 with 18 percent interest per annum as the other employee of T.A. No.1488/2009 (Annexure A-12) are now getting one more increment instead of applicants. (ii) Pass any other order which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case to meet the ends of justice. 2. As can be seen from the relief clause, the grievance of the applicants is regarding fixation of their pay w.e.f. 1.1.1996 pursuant to the revision of pay scale and also based upon the judgment rendered by this Tribunal in Shri Sukhbir Singh and others v. MCD and others (TA-1488/2009) decided on 22.1.2010. 3. Before deciding the claim of the applicants, few fa...
Mahinder Singh Yadav Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-16-2012
M.L. Chauhan: 1. The applicant has filed the present OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: “(i) To quash and set aside the seniority list dated 05.04.2010 to the extent the seniority of the applicant has not been fixed correctly. (ii) To direct the respondents to correct the seniority of the applicant in the grade of Assistant Malaria Inspector by placing him at appropriate place on the basis of his initial appointment i.e. 24th August, 1978. (iii) To allow the O.A. with costs. 2. As can be seen from the relief clause, the grievance of the applicant is that in the tentative seniority list of Assistant Malaria Inspector (AMI), as circulated vide order dated 5.4.2010 (Annexure A-1), his date of initial appointment has been shown as 25.4.1979 and he has been assigned seniority based upon the aforesaid date of his appointment in the cadre of AMI and has been placed at Sl.No.273 of the impugned seniority list. 3. The further grievance of the applicant is that his date of init...
Cce, Chandigarh Vs. M/S Prs Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-16-2012
Per. Justice Ajit Bharihoke : 1. This appeal is directed against the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, Chandigarh whereby he allowed the appeal of the assessee and set aside the order-in-original passed by the adjudicating authority confirming the central excise duty demand amounting to Rs. 6,81,428/- with interest and also imposed penalty of equal amount. 2. The respondent is manufacturer of CTD bars falling under chapter sub-heading 7214.90 of the first schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the period January, 2001 to 31.03.2003, the appellant had supplied goods to their customer and charged transportation charges over and above the price of the goods mentioned in the respective invoices. 3. The department was of the view that the transportation cost/ freight charges from the place of removal to the place of delivery ought to have been included in the value of the goods for assessing the excise duty payable. ...
M/S Insulators and Electricals Company Vs. Cce, Bhopal
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-16-2012
Per Justice Ajit Bharihoke (Oral). 1. This appeal is directed against the impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, Bhopal whereby he confirmed the order-in-original of the adjudicating authority confirming the central excise duty demand amounting to Rs. 6,32,083/- with interest and also imposed penalty of Rs. 50,000/- under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. The appellant is manufacturer of electrical insulator. During the period April 2002 to December 2003, the appellant had supplied electrical insulator to their customers and charged them transportation charges shown in the invoices in excess of the actual transportation charges paid to the transportation. 3. The Department was of the view that since the appellant has charged excess transportation charges from his customer, in view of Rule 5 of Valuation Rules, 2000, appellant is liable to pay excise duty on excess transportation charges. Accordingly, four show cause notices were issued...
Kashibatla Ramakrishna Vs. Cbi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-16-2012
SURESH KAIT, J 1. Vide the instant petition the petitioner has sought to quash the criminal case FIR no. RCA/BDI/2001 (E)/2005/CBI/BS registered for the offences punishable under Section 120B read with Section 409/420 Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 13(2) and 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, against the petitioner. 2. It is submitted by ld. Counsel for the petitioner, that whole thrust of allegation against the petitioner in the charge sheet is regarding his act as a Zonal Manager of the Bank, and by making recommendation for enhancement of Working Capital Limits of the company (A-4) and permitting the then Branch Manager, United Bank of India, Janpath Branch, New Delhi to purchase and discount the Foreign Export Bills of the Company (A-4) on DA basis. 3. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner in the charge sheet are that petitioner dishonestly and deceitfully acted upon, but has c...
Sunil Kumar Vs. Pinki and Another
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-16-2012
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J CM No.6643/2012 (condonation of delay of 73 days in filing the appeal) For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 73 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the application is allowed. FAO No. 164/2012 and CM No.6642/2012 (stay) 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 19.12.2011 passed by the Family Court, Rohini. By virtue of the impugned order, the Family Court has disposed of an interim maintenance application moved by the respondents, under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short Cr.PC). 2. The learned Family Judge in the impugned order has prima facie, assessed the income of the appellant at Rs.25,000/- p.m. and accordingly, awarded Rs.9,000/- p.m. towards maintenance of the respondents w.e.f. the date of filing of the interlocutory application i.e., 22.11.2010 till further orders. In addition, the appellant has also been directed to pay litigation expenses to the respondents to the tune of Rs.10,000/-. 3. The appel...
Jagatjit Jaiswal and Another. Vs. Karamjit Singh Jaiswal and Another.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-16-2012
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J 1. Jagatjit Jaiswal and Karamjit S.Jaiswal are real brothers. They are the sons of late Ladli Prashad Jaiswal and his wife Surjit Jaiswal. On March 03, 2000, Jagatjit Jaiswal and his wife as one group and Karamjit S.Jaiswal and his wife as the other group executed a Memorandum of Family Settlement. 2. The memorandum records that the family of late Ladli Prashad Jaiswal has substantial wealth and assets including direct and indirect holdings in public and private companies and in respect of distribution of the family wealth an oral settlement was arrived in the previous year. The written memorandum further records that a further oral agreement was arrived at between the parties on March 02, 2000, the object whereof was to avoid disputes and litigation amongst the two brothers and their wives so that peace, harmony and goodwill could be maintained. The memorandum records that the executants desired to reduce the terms of the oral settlement into a writing as an aid t...
Darshan Singh Vs. State and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-16-2012
M.L. MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition under Section 482 CrPC seeks assailing the order dated 20th August, 2010 of learned ASJ, whereby the criminal revision against the order dated 14th September, 2009 of M.M. was dismissed. 2. The petition has peculiar facts and would demonstrate an utter abuse of process of law by the petitioner. Though the petitioner is aggrieved of the unfortunate death of his son Avtar Singh, but being a practicing advocate, has left no effort to abuse the process of law. On the report lodged by him regarding the death of his son, a case under Section 304 A IPC was registered vide FIR No. 159/1995 at P.S. Agroha (Hissar) in Haryana. He being not satisfied, made a complaint to the Director General of Police, Haryana stating that it has been specifically revealed from the post-mortem report and other material that his son was murdered pursuant to the conspiracy hatched by his friends, the respondents No. 2 to 6 herein. He accordingly insisted for registration of FIR...
Jameel Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-16-2012
SURESH KAIT, J 1. The instant petition is being preferred against the judgment dated 04.02.2009, whereby the appellant has been held guilty and convicted for the offences punishable under Section 376 Indian Penal Code, 1860. Also challenged the order on sentence dated 09.02.2009 whereby, appellant was sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of the payment of fine further undergo RI for a period of 06 months. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that on 13.11.2006 at about 8 pm, prosecutrix went to purchase goods from Market. When she reached near house of one Pappu, appellant met her there. He told that his father was calling her inside. Accordingly, Prosecutrix went along with appellant inside the house. At that juncture, appellant caught hold her and dragged her to a ditch inside his house. Appellant threatened her of instant death, in case prosecutrix would raise alarm. It is further alleged that appellant made her to fall on ...
State Vs. Vikas Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-16-2012
S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J (Open Court) 1. By this Leave Petition the State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment and order of the Ld.Additional Sessions Judge dated 19.04.2011 in SC No.71/2010 by which the Respondent was acquitted for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 498-A/304-B IPC. 2. The deceased Kiran had married the Respondent/accused Vikas Sharma on 10.11.2008. The prosecution had alleged that the couple’s engagement had taken 9 months prior to the incident. After solemnizing the marriage, the couple went to Vaishno Devi for 6 days. Later Kiran went to her parental house for 3 days. Thereafter, she joined her husband. It was alleged that the body of Kiran was found at around 4-5 P.M. On 25.11.2008; she was found to be hanging in the matrimonial home, which is situated on the 2nd floor of the premises owned by PW-12. It was alleged that the accused was responsible for this on account of constant cruelty meted out by him, in connection with dowry harassme...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »