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.
S. Ramu Vs. Union of India Through Secretary and Another
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A): 1. The applicant is an Indian Revenue Service (Income Tax) (IRS in short) officer of 1983 Batch and has instituted this Original Application under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking to quash the impugned order dated 05.01.2011 (Annexure A-1) and to direct the respondents to grant him ad hoc promotion to the grade of Commissioner of Income Tax w.e.f. 02.03.2007 with consequential benefits. 2. It is the case of the applicant that despite having been recommended for promotion by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) which met on 5th and 6th November, 2002 and recommended the applicant along with others for promotion to the post of Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) which was approved by the Appointment Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) on 18.02.2003, he was not promoted to the post of Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) but his juniors were promoted w.e.f. 30.04.2003. The reason for his non-promotion was that he was placed under...
M/S Hindustant Petroleum Corpn Vs. N.S.Rane
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5912/2005 & CM 16176/2011 (u/s 17B) Reserved on:5. h October, 2012 Decided on:9. h January, 2013 % M/S HINDUSTANT PETROLEUM CORPN ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Raavi Birbal, Advocate. versus N.S.RANE Through ..... Respondent Mr. S.M. Hooda, Advcoate. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 By the present petition the Petitioner challenges the award dated 14th December, 2004 whereby the Petitioner was directed to regularize the Respondent/workman without back wages.2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that the Respondent initially filed a writ petition before this Court which was dismissed vide order dated 1st February, 2000 granting opportunity to the Petitioner to raise an industrial dispute. In the order dated 1st February, 2000 this Court clearly noted that the Respondent had produced a certificate in original which showed some corrections. Photocopy whereof was taken on record as Ex. A by this Court. Thus the date of bi...
Just Lifestyle Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Advance Magazine Publishers Inc. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Pronounced on : January 09, 2013 + FAO(OS) 36/2012 JUST LIFESTYLE PVT. LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms.Manmeet Arora, Advocate with Ms.Fareha Ahmed Khan, Advocate. versus ADVANCE MAGAZINE PUBLISHERS INC. & ANR...Respondents Represented by: Mr.Sumit Wadwa, Advocate with Ms.Megha Chandra, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The backdrop facts leading to filing of the above captioned appeal are that on November 12, 2009 the respondents filed a suit on the Original Side of this Court inter-alia praying for a decree of permanent injunction restraining the appellant or any other person acting under its authority from using the trade mark VOGUE as part of its trade mark JUST IN VOGUE in relation to its goods/services, in any manner whatsoever. Prayer(s) for rendition of accounts and delivery/destruction of infringing goods were also made in the suit. Along ...
Chief Secretary, Gnct Delhi and anr. Vs. Pramod Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2013
$~10&11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision: January 09, 2013 W.P.(C) 2268/2011 CHIEF SECRETARY, GNCT DELHI & ANR. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Ms.Ruchi Sindhwani and Ms.Bandana Shukla, Advocates. versus SUNIL RAWAT ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Pradeep Gupta, Ms.Aarti Shakalya and Mr.Parinav Gupta, Advocates. AND W.P.(C) 2271/2011 CHIEF SECRETARY, GNCT DELHI & ANR. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Ms.Ruchi Sindhwani and Ms.Bandana Shukla, Advocates. versus PRAMOD KUMAR ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Pradeep Gupta, Ms.Aarti Shakalya and Mr.Parinav Gupta, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. When their respective father died in harness and the family went into financial distress, respondents Sunil Rawat and Pramod Kumar were appointed as LDC/DASS Grade-IV by the Government of NCT Delhi as cases of compassionate appointment. Both were registered with the Employme...
The Management of Lrs Institute Vs. Devender Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 137/2009 & CM 296/2009 (stay) Reserved on:15. h October, 2012 Decided on:9. h January, 2013 % THE MANAGEMENT OF LRS INSTITUTE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ravi Sikri and Mr. Vaibhav Kalra, Advocates. versus DEVENDER KUMAR Through: ..... Respondent Mr. R.S. Nagpal and Mr. Harmeet S. Nagpal, Advocates. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 By the present petition the Petitioner seeks setting aside of the award dated 31st March, 2008 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court in the Industrial Dispute ID No. 704/06/99 wherein the learned Trial Court granted a compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the workman in lieu of reinstatement and full back wages.2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate that the reference was not made by the appropriate government. Petitioner is an autonomous body fully funded by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, th...
Ashok Behuria Vs. Ramesh Singh @ Joga Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2013
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:09. 01.2013 + CM(M) 1344/2012 ASHOK BEHURIA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Navin Kumar Jha, Advocate. Versus RAMESH SINGH @ JOGA SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mrs.Suman Bagga, Advocate for Respondent No.3/Insurance Company. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner is seeking issuance of direction to release the FDR of Rs.2,50,000/- in favour of the petitioner.2. Vide the judgment and award dated 31.05.2012, learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.6,75,000/- as compensation alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization of the amount in favour of the petitioner. The learned Tribunal further directed that out of the aforesaid awarded amount, a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- be kept in the form of FDR in the name of the petitioner for a period of three years with State Bank of India, Saket Branch, District C...
S.K.Chaudhary and ors. Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: January 09, 2013 + W.P.(C) 14160/2009 S.K.CHAUDHARY & ORS. Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. instructed by Ms.Aastha Dhawan, Adv. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Dhanesh Relan, Adv. for R-1. Mr.Sandeep P.Agarwal, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. TA No.261/2009 and TA No.262/2009 filed by the 19 writ petitioners, and one more, who for reasons best known to him chose not to litigate further by joining hands with the writ petitioners have been disposed of by a common decision dated July 08, 2009 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal.2. Noting various decisions and in particular the Constitution Bench decision of the Supreme Court reported as 2006 (4) SCC 1 Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. vs Umadevi & Ors. the view taken b...
Hardeep Bajaj Vs. Icici Bank Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:9. h January, 2013 + CRL.REV.P. 11/2013 HARDEEP BAJAJ Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Akil Rataeeya, Adv. versus ICICI BANK LTD. Through: ..... Respondent Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) Crl.MA No.227/2013 (delay) 1. There is a delay of 8 days in filing the Petition.2. For the reasons as stated in the Application, the delay of 8 days in filing the Petition is condoned.3. The Application is allowed. CRL.REV.P. 11/2013 and Crl.MA 228/2013 (stay) 4. The Petitioner approached the Respondent ICICI Bank Limited for grant of some credit facility. The Respondent Bank acceded to the Petitioners request and granted him credit facility to carry out the business of his sole Proprietorship firm Bajaj Machinery Stores. The Petitioner undertook to pay the outstanding amount to the Respondent Bank as due and payable from time to time. In discharge of part of his debts/liability towards the Respondent B...
D.T.C. Vs. Prem Nath and ors. Through Lrs
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2013
20. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision:09. 01.2013 % W.P.(C) 5785/2001 & CM No.9917/2001 D.T.C. Through: ..... Petitioner Ms. Arati Mahajan and Mr. Anand Kumar, Advocates versus PREM NATH & ORS. THROUGH LR'S ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Tarun Sharma, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner assails the award dated 13.07.2000 passed by Sh. O.P. Gupta, Presiding Officer, Labour Court IX, Tis Hazari Courts, Dellhi in ID No.184/89, 96/95. The said claim arose out of a reference made by the Government vide Notification not F.24(904)/89-Lab./8359-64 dated 10.03.1989, terms whereof read as follows: Whether the termination of services of Sh. Prem Nath is illegal and/or unjustified, and if so, to what relief is he entitled and what directions are necessary in this respect? 2. The original respondent/workman Prem Nath filed his statement of claim, wherein he claimed that he was appointed as Driver on daily wages w.e.f. 0...
Dinesh Kumar and anr Vs. Indian Airlines Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8730-31/2005 % January 09, 2013 DINESH KUMAR & ANR Through: ..... Petitioners Dr. Surat Singh, Advocate with Mr. Bhagwan Singh, Advocate. versus INDIAN AIRLINES LTD. & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Lalit Bhasin, Advocate with Ms. R.D. Dhingra, Advocate and Ms. Bhavna Dhami, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) + W.P.(C) No.8730-31/2005 and C.M. No.6558/2005 (stay) 1. In the writ petition, the following reliefs are claimed:(a) issue a Writ of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners on the post of typist as the petitioners are continuously working since 1998-2000 and five permanent vacancies of typist are available with the respondents from back date and with all consequential benefits. (b) pass any other Order which this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.2. In the case of Secretary...
- ‹ Prev
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- Next ›
- Last »