Delhi Court January 2013 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.
indraprastha Power Generation Company Ltd. Vs. Rama Kant Sharma and an ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: % + 09.01.2013 Judgment delivered on:21. 01.2013 W.P.(C) 5266/2011 and C.M. No.10681/2011 (for stay) (arising out of D.I.D. No.24/2009) INDRAPRASTHA POWER GENERATION COMPANY LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Vinay Sabharwal, Advocate. versus RAMA KANT SHARMA AND ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Salim Inamdar & Mr. Vedanta Varma, Advocates for the respondent No.1. Mr. Dhanesh Relan & Ms. Richa Kaushal, Advocates for the respondent No.2. + W.P.(C) 5433/2011 and C.M. No.11077/2011(for stay) (arising out of D.I.D No.27/2009) INDRAPRASTHA POWER GENERATION COMPANY LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Vinay Sabharwal, Advocate. versus AMARJEET SINGH AND ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Salim Inamdar & Mr. Vedanta Varma, Advocates for the respondent No.1. Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal & Mr. Hem Kumar, Advocates for the respondent No.2/GNCTD. + W.P.(C) 5553/2011and C.M. No. 11347/2011(for stay) (arising out of D.I.D No.26/2009) INDRAPRAST...
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd, Delhi Vs. M/S Prakash and Co Constructi ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order Reserved on: January 08, 2013 Order Pronounced on: January 21, 2013 + OMP No.13/2013 MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD, DELHI ..... Petitioner Through Mr.H.S. Dahiya, Adv. versus M/S PRAKASH & CO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ..... Respondent Through Mr.Siddharth Khattar, Adv. with Mr.Faizal Zafar and Mr.Rajmangal Kumar, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.I.A.No.256/2013 (for condonation of delay of 188 days in re-filing the petition) 1. The abovementioned objection petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short, called the Act) against Claims No.1 to 16 awarded in favour of the respondent by Award dated 19th January, 2012 passed by the sole Arbitrator. The award was sent by the ICADR vide letter dated 14 th February, 2012. It was received by the petitioner on 16th February, 2012.2. Along with the petition, the petitioner filed an application under Sec...
indeen Bio Power Limited Vs. Dalkia India Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: January 21, 2013 + Arb. P. No. 184/2012 Indeen Bio Power Limited. ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Hiroo Advani, Advocate with Mr.apar Gupta, Mr.Madhooja Mulay, & Mr. Aditya, Advocates. versus Dalkia India Pvt. Ltd. ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. R. Vasanth, & Ms. Prerna Kapoor, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. This petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been filed by the applicant for appointment of retired Judge of Kerala High Court as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate all the disputes between the parties in terms of clause 13.2 of the synchronization and co-ordination agreement dated 8th September, 2011.2. It is averred in the petition that in or around February 2010, the petitioner in the process of developing an 8 MW mustard residue biomass plant at Chandi, Tehsil Devli, District Tonk, Rajasth...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Sarjeevan Kumar.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Reserve:08. h January, 2013 Date of Pronouncement:21. t January, 2013. + LPA No.24/2013 & C.M.No.231/2013 (stay) DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION .... Appellant Through: Mr.Uday N. Tiwary, Adv. versus SARJEEVAN KUMAR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.G.C.Charya, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN : D.MURUGESAN, CHIEF JUSTICE C.M.No.233/2013(condonation of delay of 36 days in filing the appeal) For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 36 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the application is allowed. LPA No.24/2013 1. This intra Court appeal is preferred by Delhi Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the management) being aggrieved by the order dismissing the writ petition filed by it questioning the award made by the Industrial Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) reinstating the respondent-workman (hereinafter referred to as the workman) with full backwages.2. The s...
Dr. R.S.A. Dhani Vs. State (Cbi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % CRL. A. NO.592/1999 + # ! Date of Decision: January 21, 2013 V.S. MURTHY ....Appellant Through: Mr. Satish Tamta & Ms. Nisha Nayarnan, Advs. Versus $ Respondent Through: Mr. R.V. Sinha, Adv. STATE (CBI) AND CRL. A. NO.593/1999 DR. R.S.A. DHANI ....Appellant Through: Mr. K. B. Andly, Sr. Adv. with Mr. M.L.Yadav, Advocate Versus STATE (CBI) * Respondent Through: Mr. R.V. Sinha, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K.BHASIN JUDGMENT P.K. BHASIN, J: These two appeals were filed by two accused who were convicted by the learned Special Judge vide judgment dated 29th October, 1999 for the commission of the offences punishable under Section 120-B read with Section 420 IPC and Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 order while accused-appellant V.S.Murthy was convicted individually for the substantive offences under Section 420 IPC and Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 also. Vide order dated 30th October, 1999 p...
Cit Vs. Gangeshwari Metal Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on :21. 01.2013 ITA 597/2012 CIT ..... Appellant versus GANGESHWARI METAL PVT LTD ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr Puneet Gupta, Jr. Standing Counsel. For the Respondent: Mr O.P. Sapra with Mr Sandeep Sapra, Advocates. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) In this appeal the following question of law has been framed for our consideration by virtue of the order dated 16.10.2011: Whether the Tribunal by the impugned order dated 19.12.2011 fell into error in upholding the order of the appellate commissioner which directed deletion of `55,50,000/- added on account of unexplained share application, added by the Assessing Officer in the case of the assessee under Section 68 of the Act? The learned counsel for the revenue/ appellant submitted that the Commissioner of I...
New Delhi Municipal Council Vs. Deepak Wadhwa
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on Judgment pronounced on: :14.01. 2013 :21.01.2013 LPA 63/2012 and CM No.1722/2012(stay) NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Through : ..... Appellant Mr. Rajesh Mahajan with Mr. Piyush Gaur and Mr. Arun Bhardwaj , Adv. versus DEEPAK WADHWA Through : .... Respondent Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Adv. for Workman. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN V.K. JAIN, J.1. On 14th September, 1992, the respondent was appointed as a Beldar with the appellant on muster roll, for a period of ninety days. Vide subsequent order dated 18th September, 1992, he was appointed in the same capacity, again for a period of ninety days. It was stated in the order dated 18th September, 1992 that his appointment will not confer any right for regular appointment and will automatically come to an end on the expiry of aforesaid period or could be terminated earlier, at any time, without assigning any notice or without reason. Vide order dated...
N.D.P.L Vs. BhasIn Motors Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2013
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:17. 01.2013 Judgment pronounced on:21. 01.2013 LPA No.1082/2007 & CM 9601/2007 N.D.P.L ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Vikram Nandrajog and Mr. Sushil Jaiswal, Advs. versus BHASIN MOTORS PVT. LTD. Through : ... Respondent None CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN V.K. JAIN, J.1. An electricity connection with sanctioned load of 83 KW for industrial purposes was installed in property No. 56-B, Army Road, Najafgarh Industrial Area, Delhi, where the respondent was carrying its business. On 11.09.2004, some officials of the appellant carried out inspection of the premises of the respondent and found that: (i) Upper seal of the meter box had been tempered. (ii) Cover seals were missing and (iii) There were scratches on the dial plate. According to the appellant, the inspection report concluded that the respondent was indulging in Dishonest Abstraction of Electricity...
indraprastha Power Generation Company Ltd. Vs. Krishan Chakervorty and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: % + 09.01.2013 Judgment delivered on:21. 01.2013 W.P.(C) 5266/2011 and C.M. No.10681/2011 (for stay) (arising out of D.I.D. No.24/2009) INDRAPRASTHA POWER GENERATION COMPANY LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Vinay Sabharwal, Advocate. versus RAMA KANT SHARMA AND ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Salim Inamdar & Mr. Vedanta Varma, Advocates for the respondent No.1. Mr. Dhanesh Relan & Ms. Richa Kaushal, Advocates for the respondent No.2. + W.P.(C) 5433/2011 and C.M. No.11077/2011(for stay) (arising out of D.I.D No.27/2009) INDRAPRASTHA POWER GENERATION COMPANY LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Vinay Sabharwal, Advocate. versus AMARJEET SINGH AND ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Salim Inamdar & Mr. Vedanta Varma, Advocates for the respondent No.1. Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal & Mr. Hem Kumar, Advocates for the respondent No.2/GNCTD. + W.P.(C) 5553/2011and C.M. No. 11347/2011(for stay) (arising out of D.I.D No.26/2009) INDRAPRAST...
Kshetra Pal Singh Vs. Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No. 631/1997 January, 21, 2013 KSHETRA PAL SINGH Through: ......Petitioner Mr. A.K.Behera, Advocate. VERSUS NCT OF DELHI & ORS Through: ...... Respondents Ms. Latika Chaudhary, Adv. for Ms. Avnish Ahlawat, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the charge sheet dated 25.4.1994 and the impugned order dated 21.2.1995 of the Disciplinary Authority imposing punishment of compulsory retirement on the petitioner.2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Peon in the office of respondent no.2 on 15.12.1973. He was thereafter appointed to the post of Dispatch Rider in 1987 and he did such duties till 1994. Petitioner was placed under suspension on 31.3.1994 inasmuch as an MLA Sh. Darshan Kumar Behl complained that he had not received list of business of assembly. W.P.(C) 631/1997 pet...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »