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.
Om Prakash Singh Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:8. h January, 2013 + CRL. M.C. 3293/2012 OM PRAKASH SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. M.K. Bhardwaj, Adv. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State/R1 & R-2. Mr. G.P.Singh, Adv. for R-3 along with Respondent No.3 in person. SI Sandeep, PS Begumpur. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) preferred by the Petitioner for quashing of FIR No.272/2011, under Section 420/468/471 IPC, Police Station Begumpur and consequential proceedings arising out of the same.2. FIR No.272/2011 was registered in the Police Station Begumpur on the complaint made by Respondent No.3 Urmila Chaudhary to the effect that a sum of `23.75 lacs was paid by Respondent No.3 to the Petitioner as sale consideration of Plot No.43-G, Pkt. 25, Sector 24, Rohini, Delhi. Later on, the Compl...
New Cawnpore Flour Mills Ltd. Vs. Bakemans Industries P. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2013
* #19 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CO.PET. 204 of 2003 NEW CAWNPORE FLOUR MILLS LTD. Through: None ..... Petitioner versus BAKEMANS INDUSTRIES P. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Sr. Advocate with Abhinit Das, Adv. for ex-Management of Respondent Mr. Rajiv K. Garg, Mr. Ashok Rana & Ms. Kavita Rawat, Advs. for Applicant (CA No.1367 of 2005) Mr. P.S. Bindra & Ms. Shweta Priyadarshini, Advs. for IFCI in CA No.1547 of 2012 Mr. Atul Sharma, Adv. for IDBI Mr. Jayant K. Sud, AAG, Punjb with Ms. Tara V. Ganju, Ms. Etti Sharma, Mr. Vishal & Mr. Chigra Khurana, Advs. for PSPCL Ms. Rama Ahluwalia, Adv. for Sales Tax Department, State of Maharashtra Mr. Jay Salva & Ms. Amrita Mishra, Advs. for SICOM Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Rohini Musa, Ms. Aanchal Yadav & Ms. Sara Sundaram, Advs. for Ceylon Biscuit Ltd. Mr. Anoop Bagai, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Adv. in CA No.1367 of 2005. Mr. Rajiv Bahl, Adv. for OL. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR % ORDER 08 0...
Rohit House Occupants Welfare Association (Regd.) Vs. K.S. Chowdhary a ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2013
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + I.A. 21/2013 in CS(OS) 277/2005 Date of Decision:08. 01.2013 ROHIT HOUSE OCCUPANTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION (REGD.) AND ANOTHER Plaintiffs Through: Versus Respondents K.S. CHOWDHARY AND ORS. Through: Mr. L.C. Chechi, Advocate for defendant No.1. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA M.L. MEHTA, J.(Oral) I.A. 279/2013 (under Section 151 CPC) This is an application under Section 151 CPC seeking restoration of the application I.A. 21/2013, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 04.01.2013. Heard. For the reasons stated in the application, I.A. 21/2013 is restored. The application stands disposed of. I.A. 21/2013 (under Section 151 CPC) The plaintiffs had filed a suit for declaration and injunction. The plaintiff No. 1 is an association of which other plaintiffs are members, being the occupants of different flats in the building known as Rohit House, situated at 3, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi. Defendants No. 1 to 11 are occupants/employees of the occupant...
Sh.Mahabir Singh Vs. the Administrator Govt. of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.2009/1995 % January 08, 2013 SH.MAHABIR SINGH Through: ...... Petitioner Mr. U.S.Chaudhary, Adv. VERSUS THE ADMINISTRATOR GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ...... Respondent Through: CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner-Sh.Mahabir Singh seeking benefits of employment from 8.8.1977 instead of from 1.7.1984 which has been granted by the Director of Education/respondent No.2.2. The facts of the case are that petitioner claims to have been appointed as a TGT (Hindi) in the school-Vijay Jyoti Co-Education Middle School, Usmanpur, Delhi-53. A typed copy of the appointment letter of the petitioner as TGT (Hindi) has been filed as annexure P-1 (page 13 to the petition). The petitioner claims that the school was a recognized school when the petitioner took employment with the sc...
Amul Urhwareshe Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:8. h January, 2013 + CRL. M.C. 3071/2012 AMUL URHWARESHE Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Vishal Gosain Adv. with Mr. Harsh Bora, Adv. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State. Mr. Ashok Anand Adv. with Ms. Priya Pathania, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The present Petition is allowed in terms of the judgment passed today in Crl.MC No.1050/2012 titled AMUL URHWARESHE v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.2. For detailed order, please see the above mentioned judgment. (G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE JANUARY 08 2013 vk...
Amul Urhwareshe Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:8. h January, 2013 + CRL. M.C. 3073/2012 AMUL URHWARESHE Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Vishal Gosain Adv. with Mr. Harsh Bora, Adv. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State. Mr. Ashok Anand Adv. with Ms. Priya Pathania, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The present Petition is allowed in terms of the judgment passed today in Crl.MC No.1050/2012 titled AMUL URHWARESHE v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.2. For detailed order, please see the above mentioned judgment. (G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE JANUARY 08 2013 vk...
R.D.Mishra Vs. Uoi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2013
$~R33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: January 08, 2013 + W.P.(C) 3892/2001 R.D.MISHRA ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.J.P.Sengh, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Zubeda Begum, Mr.Sumeet Batra, Ms.Ankita Gupta, Advocates. versus UOI AND ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(ORAL) 1. Order dated September 24, 1999 cancelling allotment of Quarter No.3-LF Todar Mal Square, New Delhi made in favour of the petitioner, against which appeal filed by the petitioner was rejected vide order dated July 28, 2000 compelled the writ petitioner to file O.A. No.2339/2000 which has been dismissed by the Central Administrative Tribunal vide impugned order dated June 7, 2001.2. The cancellation of the quarter was on the ground that the petitioner, to whom the quarter was allotted as a licensee had sub-let the same.3. As per the petitioner he had not sub-let the quarter. His daughter...
Ex.Cpl. O.P. Singh and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-2013
By Chairperson 1. All the above four petitions arise out of single incident i.e. leakage of question papers for the Selection Test. Therefore, they are disposed of by a common order. 2. For convenient disposal of all the four petitions, the facts given in the case of Ex-Cpl O.P.Singh are taken into consideration. 3. The Selection test phase I (ST) for Non-Tech (NT) entries was planned at seven Airmen Selection Centres (ASCs) including 3 ASC (Kanpur) between 11 and 16 Nov 02. The printing of question papers (QPs) for the November 02 ST began on 16 Oct 02 and was completed on 01 Nov, 2002. These question papers were dispatched to various ASCs as per the procedure laid down by CASB. The selection test started as per the schedule. On 16 November, 2002 at 3 ASC (Kanpur) at about 1700 hrs, it was reported that some question papers were in circulation with the candidates outside. These candidates were apprehended along with the question papers with the help of PandS staff and civil police. On...
D.D.A. Vs. Rohtash Panwar and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5803/2008 & CM 11126/2008 Reserved on:11. h October, 2012 Decided on:7. h January, 2013 % D.D.A. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Arun Birbal, Advocate. versus ROHTASH PANWAR & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Pradeep Kumar Arya with Ms. Huma Mehfooz, Advocates for Respondent No.1. Mr. Amar Nath Saini, Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 By the present petition the Petitioner seeks setting aside of the award dated 21st January, 2008 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal in Industrial Dispute ID No. 482/89/07 wherein the learned Tribunal granted the relief of reinstatement with 50% back wages to the workmen.2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that the learned Trial Court erred in not appreciating that the Respondents were engaged for a short period on account of temporary exigencies of work and their services were disengaged after completion of the project. Even if the...
Tirupati Texknit Limited (T.T. Ltd) Vs. Habib Bank Limited and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:02. 11.2012 Date of decision:07. 01.2013 + RFA (OS) 20/2007 TIRUPATI TEXKNIT LIMITED (T.T. LTD.) .Appellant Through: Ms. Shilpi Jain Sharma, Advocate. Versus HABIB BANK LIMITED AND ORS. .Respondents Through: Sh. Pramod. B. Agarwala with Sh. Aayush Agarwala, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT % Facts:1. In this appeal, an unsuccessful plaintiff impugns the judgment and order of a learned Single judge of this Court, dismissing its suit for recovery of money from the first respondent (hereafter called the defendant Bank).2. The Plaintiff is a public limited Company constituted under the Companies Act, 1956. It owns 100% export oriented spinning mills and carries on the business of manufacturing, trading, exporting hosiery, yarn, fabric and textiles. The respondent Bank is incorporated in Pakistan having its branches in Pakistan as well as Bangladesh. The se...
- ‹ Prev
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- Next ›
- Last »