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.
Siddharth Optical Disc Pvt. Ltd and Others Vs. Union of India and Anot ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:11. 01.2013 WP (C) No. 13231/2009 SIDDHARTH OPTICAL DISC PVT. LTD & OTHERS ... Petitioners ... Respondents versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners For the Respondents : MrN.K. Kaul, Sr Advocate with MrVineetMalhotra : MrSatishAggarwal with Mr P.K. Sharma and MrSantosh P. Chaurasia AND + WP (C) No. 8165/2011 SIDDHARTH OPTICAL DISC PVT. LTD &ANOTHER ... Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners For the Respondents : Mr N.K. Kaul, Sr Advocate with MrVineetMalhotra : Mr P.K. Sharma with MrSantosh P. Chaurasia CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MRJUSTICE V.K. JAIN JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J 1.These writ petitions raise common issues and are, therefore being disposed of by this common judgment. WP(C) 13231/2009 pertains to the period March, 2005 to March, 2009, whereas WP(C) 8165/2011 ...
Nutan Kumar and anr. Vs. Rajesh Arora and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on :03. 01.2013. Judgment delivered on:11. 01.2013. + FAO (OS) No.284/2009 NUTAN KUMAR & ANR. Through: ..... Appellants Mr. V.S. Chauhan, Adv. versus RAJESH ARORA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Sumit Bansal, Mr. Ateev Mathur & Mr. Ajay Monga, Advs. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.. 1 This appeal has impugned the order of the Single Judge dated 25.03.2009 wherein the probate petition filed by Rajesh Arora (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) seeking probate of a Will dated 01.06.1995 (Ex. PW-4/3) executed by his late father Tilak Raj Akalgariah (hereinafter referred to as the testator) had been decreed. 2 Record shows that the testator had five children i.e. three sons and two daughters. His wife had predeceased him. The Will purported to have been executed by him had bequeathed his properties both moveable and immoveable in favour of th...
Harinder Singh Vs. D.T.C. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : January 11, 2013 + WP(C) 154/2013 HARINDER SINGH Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.T.N.Tripathi, Advocate versus D.T.C. & ANR. Respondents Represented by: Ms.Avinash Ahlawat, Advocate with Ms.Latika Chaudhary, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. The petitioner started unauthorisedly absenting himself from duty on June 8, 1989 and as per Regulation 14(10)(c) of the Delhi Road Transport Authority (Conditions of Appointment and Service) Regulations, 1952 he was deemed to have resigned from service w.e.f. September 07, 1989 i.e. upon his being unauthrisedly absent for a continuous period of 90 days.2. The Disciplinary Authority of the writ petitioner passed an order on September 07, 1989 regarding as aforesaid.3. The petitioner sat quiet in his house and only on October 20, 2011 i.e. after 22 years submitted an appeal questioning his being trea...
Kehar Singh @ Kehri Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :4. h January, 2013 Pronounced on :11th January, 2013 % + CRL.A.132/2009 KEHAR SINGH @ KEHRI Through: .....Appellant Mr. Sumit Verma, Adv. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr.Navin Sharma, APP for State. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI % PRATIBHA RANI, J.1. The appellant Kehar Singh is aggrieved from the judgment dated 07.11.2008 vide which he was convicted under Section 21 of NDPS Act for being found in possession of commercial quantity of heroine.2. Learned Special Judge (NDPS), after hearing the appellant on the point of sentence on 12.11.2008, sentenced him to undergo RI for 10 years and also to pay a fine of Rs.1 lac and in default of payment of fine, to undergo SI for six months.3. In brief, the case of the prosecution against the petitioner is that on 04.05.2004 at about 11.00 am, a secret information was received by HC Vinod Kumar about the petitioner arriving near Nigam Bodh Ghat, Hanuman Mandir, Yamuna Bazaa...
Madhu Gupta Vs. Director of Income-tax (investigation) and Others
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:11. 01.2013 WP (C) No. 1417/2011 MADHU GUPTA ... Petitioner versus DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (Investigation) AND OTHERS ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner For the Respondents : Mr Dr Rakesh Gupta with Mr Ashwani Taneja and Mr Rani Kiyala : Ms Suruchi Aggarwal CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE V.K. JAIN JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J 1.In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:(I) To declare the authorization of income-tax search u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as illegal in the case of the petitioner. (II) To direct the concerned authority of the income tax department to vacate prohibitory order passed u/s 132(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with respect to three bank lockers of the petitioner. (III) To direct the concerned authority of income tax department to release the papers / documents seized from the residence of the peti...
Worldlink Finance Ltd. Vs. Regency Industries Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
* #5 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CO.PET. 281 of 1996 WORLDLINK FINANCE LTD. ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Vibhu Bakhru, Senior Advocate with Mr. P. Nagesh and Mr. Rajat Arora, Advocates for Propounder of Scheme. versus REGENCY INDUSTRIES LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. Mayank Goel, Advocate for the Official Liquidator. Mr. Shiv K.Tyagi, Advocate for State Bank of Patiala. Mr. Hem C. Vashisht with Mr. Gaurav Sharma and Ms. Pooja Sharma, Advocates for Applicant in Co. Application 1177 of 2012. Mr. K.K. Rai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Krishnanand Pandey and Mr. Amrendra Kumar Choubey, Advocates for GDA. Mr. Mayank Kumar, Advocate for Co. Applications 2167, 2169, 2170 of 2012. Mr. Rishi Sehgal, Advocate for Applicants in CA No. 2182, 2507, 2506 of 2012. Mr. Anil K. Khaware, Advocate for Applicant in CA No. 2234 of 2012. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR % ORDER 11 01.2013 Co. Application No. 2132 of 2012 (filed by Propounder for clarification of the Scheme of Arrangement) 1. Mr. K....
Union of India and ors Vs. Brij Fertilizers Pvt Ltd and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA 1094/2011 UNION OF INDIA & ORS Through: ..... Appellants Mr Ruchir Mishra, Adv. versus BRIJ FERTILIZERS PVT LTD & ORS Through : ..... Respondents Mr. Kaushal Yadav and Ms Mamta Rani, Adv. for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN ORDER 11 01.2013 % The grievance of the respondent/writ petitioner was that the release of subsidy to its unit manufacturing Single Super Phosphate (SSP) has been postponed till allegation in the legal proceedings pending against them in terms of an order dated 28.09.2001, issued by Ministry of Fertilizers and Chemicals. The learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated 07.092010 noted that the legal proceedings which had been initiated against writ petitioner No. 1/respondent No.1 Brij Fertilizers (P) Ltd. and which had culminated in filing of a charge sheet on 12.12.2002 had resulted in discharge of the Managing Director and the CEO of petitioner No.1. This assertion of respond...
Air India Ltd Vs. Uniion of India and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:11. 01.2013 CUS. A. A.No.2/2013 [W.P.(C) 6841/2012 & CM 17835/2012] AIR INDIA LTD ... Appellant versus UNIION OF INDIA AND ORS ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner/Appellant : Mr Manoj Arora with Ms Shaista Arora and Mr Siddharth Shankar For the Respondent No.1 : Ms Sweety Manchanda For the Respondent Nos.2&3 : Satish Kumar with Ms Sonia Sharma CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of Air India Limited makes an oral request that this writ petition be treated as an appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 inasmuch as the order impugned is an order dated 30.04.2012 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (CESTAT) in Customs ROA Application No. 41/2011 in Customs Appeal No. 538/2007. According to the learned counsel, the impugned order d...
Parmanand Lal Vs. Secretary, Deptt. of Telecommunications
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : January 11, 2013 + W.P.(C) 4639/2012 PARMANAND LAL ...Petitioner Represented by: Ms.Jyoti Singh, Sr.Advocate instructed by Ms.Saahila Lamba, Advocate with petitioner in person. versus SECRETARY, DEPTT. OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS ...Respondents Represented by: Mr.R.V.Sinha, Mr.R.N.Singh and Mr.Pradeep Kumar, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) CM No.9602/2012 Allowed; subject to just exceptions. WP(C) No.4639/2012 1. The factual backdrop leading to the filing of the present petition is that the petitioner, an officer who has retired from service in the Department of Telecommunication was selected for appointment to the grade of Junior Engineer (also known as Engineering Supervisor) in Telegraph Engineering Service (Group-B) in the year 1966 and was sent for one year training at Telecommunication Centre, Jabalpur. After successful completion of tr...
Urmila Devi Vs. Delhi Development Authority and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:11. h January, 2013 % + LPA No.825/2012 URMILA DEVI Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Raiz Farooqui, Adv. Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS..... Respondents Through: Mr. Rajiv Bansal, Adv. for DDA. Mr. H.S. Sachdeva & Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, Advs. for R-3 with Station House Officer, P.S. Kalkaji. Mr. Balendu Shekhar, Adv. for MCD. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.This intra-court appeal impugns the order dated 17.10.2012 of the learned Single Judge of dismissal of W.P.(C) No.6391/2012 preferred by the appellant. The counsel for the respondents appeared on advance notice when the appeal came up first and with the consent of the counsels, the appeal was finally heard and judgment reserved.2. The appellant, claiming to be a hawker selling her wares from a pavement in the Nehru Place Commercial Complex, had filed the writ petition from which this appeal arises pleading that...