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.
Ravinder Kumar and ors Vs. New India Insurance Company Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2013
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:15. h January, 2013 + MAC. (A) 72/2010 RAVINDER KUMAR & ORS ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Rakesh Kakkar, Adv. Versus NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Varun Sarin and Mr. Manish Jain, Advs. Mr. Kunwar Pal Singh and Mr. Harmesh Kumar, Advs. for R3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Instant appeal has been filed by the appellant / owner of the offending vehicle against the impugned award dated 14.10.2009 whereby ld. Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.5,59,214/- with interest @ 7.5% from the date of filing of the petition till the date of realization minus the amount of interim compensation, if any, paid to the claimants in past.2. While passing the impugned award, ld. Tribunal opined that all the respondents (therein) are jointly and severally liable, but since the vehicle being insured, the liability for making the payment will be that of the insurance ...
Mr. Mohd. GhayasuddIn Khan Vs. Jamia Millia Islamia and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.1754/1997 % January 15, 2013 MR. MOHD. GHAYASUDDIN KHAN ...... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Safaya, Advocate. Versus JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA AND ANR. Through: None. ..... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The subject writ petition has been filed by the petitioner who is a Lab Technician in the respondent No.1/Jamia Millia Islamia. The petitioner is a Lab Technician working in the Department of Engineering and Technology. The petitioner states that Lab Technicians in the Department of Engineering and Technology are only getting the pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040/- whereas Lab Technicians in the Department of Mass Communication and Research Centre of the respondent No.1 University are getting pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300/- as per AICTE norms and therefore the petitioner should also be entitled to the same pay scale as those of a Lab Technician in the Departmen...
K.C.Meena and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2013
$~R-35 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : January 15, 2013 + W.P.(C) 4269/2001 K.C.MEENA & ORS. ...Petitioners Represented by: Dr.M.P.Raju, Advocate with Ms.Mary Scaria, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Represented by: Nemo. ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. The issue is short and we have heard learned counsel for the writ petitioners.2. Raghubir Singh, Prem Eswar, Nand Lal, M.R.S.Shital, Mahboob Singh and Veer Singh filed O.A.No. 948/1998 before the Central Administrative Tribunal challenging the roster in the cadre of Income Tax Officers issued on June 9, 1997 followed by promotion orders dated October 31, 1997, December 31, 1997, February 02, 1998, February 09, 1998, March 25, 1998 and March 31, 1998 pertaining to M.L.Wasan, Jitender Chand, Shiv Dayal, M.L. Meena and Hira Singh Nagi.3. Pithily stated, the applicants before the Tribunal were members of Schedu...
Shri Siddharth Grover Vs. Smt. Dropti Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:9. h November, 2012 Pronounced on:15. h January, 2013 + MAC.APP. 174/2005 SHRI SIDDHARTH GROVER Through: Mr. Ashok Popli, Adv. ...... Appellant versus SMT. DROPTI DEVI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. for R-4/Insurance Company. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. The present Appeal is disposed of in terms of the judgment passed today in MAC.APP. 159/2005 titled SHRI SIDDHARTH GROVER v. SMT. KUSMA DEVI & ORS.2. For detailed order, please see the above mentioned judgment. (G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE JANUARY 15 2013 vk...
Rajender Singh Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA 39/2013 and CM No. 754/2013 (Stay) & 755/2013 (Exemption) RAJENDER SINGH ..... Appellant Through: Counsel for the appellant. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr V.K. Tandon, Adv for respondents 1 to 3 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN % ORDER 15 01.2013 The consolidation of land holdings of village Karala started in the year 1975-76. During consolidation proceedings, the appellant Rajender Singh and respondents 8 to 20 were allotted land in lieu of their pre- consolidation holding, including the land comprised in Khasra No. 168, measuring 11 biswas, in repartition under Section 21(1) of East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention Of Fragmentation) Act 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and they were put in physical possession of the said land. Respondents No. 4 to 7 in this appeal, namely, Shri Tej Ram, Shri Satbir Singh, Shri Ranbir Singh and Master Navin, filed ...
Mahesh Chand Vs. Dtc
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 47/2009 & CM 102/2009 (stay) Reserved on:17. h October, 2012 Decided on:15. h January, 2013 % MAHESH CHAND Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Advocate. Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Parmod Kumar, Advocate. versus DTC CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 By the present petition the Petitioner lays a challenge to the order dated 15th January, 2008 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court holding that the inquiry was fair and legal and the award dated 27th March, 2008 holding that the termination of the Petitioner was not illegal or unjustified thus no relief was granted to the Petitioner.2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that the Petitioner was charge sheeted for being absent from 1st August, 1994 to 15th August, 1994. The absence on earlier two occasions considered by the Inquiry Officer in the charge sheet, that is, of 117 days in 1993 and 73 days in 1994 was wholly erroneous as penalty of stoppage of fo...
Varita Soni Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl. Appeal No. 928/2011 Reserved on:2. d January, 2013 Date of Decision:15. h January, 2013 % VARITA SONI Through ....Appellant Mr. Joginder Tuli, Mr. Ashu Kumar Sharma and Ms. Damini, Advocates. Versus STATE .Respondent Through Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDHARTH MRIDUL SANJIV KHANNA, J.The appellant Varita Soni, by this appeal challenges her conviction vide impugned judgment dated 21st May, 2011, arising out of FIR No. 80 dated 31st January, 2007, P.S. Dabri, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short) for contriving and murdering her step-daughter Vandana Soni, aged around 9/10 years on 31st January, 2007.2. The appellant has also impugned order of sentence dated 31st May, 2011, by which she was sentenced to imprisonment for life, out of which she has to undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment. According to the trial court directions the appellant is not be releas...
Puneet Gupta and anr Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:15. h January, 2013 + CRL. M.C. 756/2012 PUNEET GUPTA & ANR Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Satish Kumar Tripathi, Advocate versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. A complaint under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954(the Act) was filed as a sample of Fruit Yogurt purchased from one Gian Chand Bedi was found to be not conforming to the standard of Fruit Yogurt and thus adulterated. M/s L-Comps & Impex Pvt. Ltd. was impleaded as accused No.7 being the importer of the sampled commodity. One Anu Sharma was impleaded as accused No.8, as he was a nominee appointed under Section 17 of the Act of accused No.7.2. While the prosecution evidence was being recorded in the complaint case filed by the Food Inspector, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, an application dated 20.11.2007 was moved by earlier said Anu Sharma for dropping pro...
Synergy Waste Management Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on:07. 01.2013 Judgment pronounced on:15. 01.2013 W.P.(C)NO. 6976/2008 and W.P.(C) 5683/2010 P.K.NAYYAR & ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. K.K.Rohatgi, Adv. Versus UOI & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. B.V.Niren, CGSC with Mr. Prasouk Jain, Adv. for UOI. Mr. Nishakant Pandey, Adv. for DJB. Mr. Ajay Verma, Adv. for DDA. Mr. Madan Gera, Adv. for R-7. Ms. Pinky Anand, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Natasha Saharawat and Ms. Ankita Mishra, Advs. AND SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT.LTD. Through: Mr. K.K.Rohatgi, Adv. ..... Petitioner Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through : LPA Nos.6976 /2008 & 5683/2010 ..... Respondents Mr. B.V.Niren, CGSC with Mr. Prasouk Jain, Adv. for UOI. Mr. Nishakant Pandey, Adv. for DJB. Mr. Ajay Verma, Adv. for DDA. Mr. Madan Gera, Adv. for R-7. Ms. Pinky Anand, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Natasha Saharawat and Ms. Ankita Mishra, Advs. Page 1 of 14 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN V.K. JAIN, J.1. The...
Anita Sharma Vs. State Nct of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-14-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :14. hJanuary, 2013 + CRL.M.C. 2985/2011 & Crl.M.A.No.10534/2011 ANITA SHARMA Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.Yashpal Singh, Advocate. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP for the State. Mr.Surendar Kumar SethiRespondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing of the summoning order dated 09.06.2009 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi in C.C.No.3102/2009 titled Surender Kumar Sethi Vs. M/s Amabica Research and Development Pvt. and the consequent proceedings.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent No.2 in person. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that after the issuance of cheque for a sum of `29,893/- to respondent No.2 as salary for the month of February, 2009, `10,000/- in cash were paid on account of par...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »