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.
Puran Singh Vs. Director, Directorate of Printing and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : January 07, 2013. + W.P.(C) 7371/2000 PURAN SINGH ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Rajeev Sharma, Advocate and Mr.Uddyam Mukherjee, Advocate. versus DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF PRINTING & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Rajat Soni, Advocate for Ms.Sonia Mathur, Advocate with Mr.Sandeep Palaria, LDC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) CM No.2108/2012 & CM No.2109/2012 1. The writ petition was disposed of on August 11, 2011 granting partial relief to the writ petitioner. On said date nobody appeared for the respondents as recorded in the memo of parties.2. Vide CM No.2108/2012 it is prayed that the order dated August 11, 2011 be recalled and vide CM No.2109/2012 it is prayed that 142 days delay in seeking recall of the order dated August 11, 2011 be condoned.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the applications may be allowed prov...
General Manager, Canara Bank and Others Vs. Kuldeep Raj Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:07. 01.2013 LPA No. 771/2010 GENERAL MANAGER, CANARA BANK & OTHERS ... Appellants ... Respondent versus KULDEEP RAJ SHARMA Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellants For the Respondent : Mr Naveen R. Nath : Ms Sumedha Sharma CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE V.K. JAIN JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J 1.This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 09.02.2010 passed by a learned single Judge of this court in WP (C) 7383/2009 as also against the order dated 20.09.2010 passed by the said learned single Judge in the review petition No.243/2010. By virtue of the judgment dated 09.02.2010, the respondents writ petition was allowed and by virtue of the order dated 20.09.2010, the appellants review petition was dismissed.2. The issue sought to be raised in the present appeal pertains to the manner in which the period for which the respondent Kuldeep Raj Sharma was under susp...
Om Prakash and ors Vs. Old Village Industries Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3366/2008 Reserved on:10. h October, 2012 Decided on:7. h January, 2013 % OM PRAKASH & ORS Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Jabbar Hussain, Advocate. versus OLD VILLAGE INDUSTRIES LTD. Through: None Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 ..... Respondent By the present petition, the Petitioners challenge the award dated 21st January, 2008 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court in the industrial dispute ID No. 225/2006 wherein the learned trial court awarded a compensation of Rs. 35,000/- each in favour of Petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 and a compensation of Rs. 40,000/- in favour of the Petitioner No. 2 in lieu of reinstatement and full back wages.2. Learned counsel for the Petitioners contends that the learned trial court, while passing the award, has failed to consider that the workmen/Petitioners had worked with the Management for quite sometime. Learned Labour Court wrongly placed reliance on Employers, Management of Centr...
Disha Vashishtha and anr. Vs. Ndmc and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : January 07, 2013. + W.P.(C) 3372/2011 DISHA VASHISHTHA & ANR. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Petitioners in person. versus NDMC & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Kanika Agnihotri, Advocate for R-1. Mr.C.B.N.Babu, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) WP(C) No.3372/2011 1. Late Smt.Nirmala was an employee of the New Delhi Municipal Council (respondent No.1) and she unfortunately died in harness and was survived by her daughter (petitioner No.1), husband (petitioner No.2) and minor son (respondent No.2). Upon her death an issue arose as to who would be entitled to the dues payable and lying to the credit of the account of the deceased with the department as also pension. During her lifetime the deceased had nominated her minor son Jai Sharma (respondent No.2) as a nominee to receive gratuity and provident fund deducted every...
Guru Nanak Public School Vs. Arjun
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
23. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % Date of Decision:07. 01.2013 W.P.(C) 67/2013 & C.M. Nos.131-132/2013 GURU NANAK PUBLIC SCHOOL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Anil Sapra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rakesh Malhotra, Advocate versus ARJUN ..... Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner assails the award dated 21.05.2012 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court XI, Karkardooma Court, Delhi bearing Computer ID No.02402C0053722010. The respondent filed a direct industrial dispute before the Labour Court under section 10(4A) of the Industrial Disputes Act (ID Act) against the petitioner, namely, Guru Nanak Public School through its Chairman as well as through its Principal.2. The case of the respondent was that he was appointed by the management of the school on the post of Sweeper on 09.10.1992 and that he had been working since then. On 29.09.2009, the respondents services were terminated by the management without any re...
Smt. Anjali Sehgal Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:7. h January, 2013 + BAIL APPL. 1842/2012 SMT. ANJALI SEHGAL Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Deepak Dhingra, Adv. with Mr. Nishant Arora, Adv. . versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Jasbir Kaur, APP for the State. Harish Malhotra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. R.K.Modi, Adv. for the Complainant. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The present Petition is dismissed in terms of the order passed today in BAIL APPL.1814/212 titled M.M. SEHGAL v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI).2. For detailed order, please see the above mentioned order. (G.P. MITTAL) JUDGE JANUARY 07 2013 vk...
DIn Mohd. (Deceased) and ors. Vs. the Dy. Custodian General of Evacuee ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:16. 11.2012 Date of decision:07. 01.2013 + REV. PET. 198/2011, C.M. APPL. 4734/2011, 4735/2011 & 4736/2011 IN W.P. (C) 2385/1982 REV. PET. 436/2011, C.M. APPL. 11823/2011, 11824/2011, 11825/2011 & 11826/2011 IN W.P.(C) 2385/1982 DIN MOHD. (DECEASED) AND ORS. .Appellants Through: Sh. Sanjeev Narula and Sh. Ekram Ali, Advocates. Versus THE DY. CUSTODIAN GENERAL OF EVACUEE PROPERTY AND ORS. .Respondents Through: Sh. Sanjeev Sahay, Advocate, for Dy. Custodian. Sh. N.S. Vashisht, Advocate, for Review Petitioners. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. This common judgment will dispose of two Review Petitions, i.e. Rev. Pet. 198/2011, preferred by the third-party/petitioner Ms. Neelam Arya (hereafter referred to by her name) and R.P.A. 436/2011, filed by the REV. PET. 198/11, REV. PET. 436/11 & pending applications Page 1 Deputy Custodian General, who was the respondent in the original writ petition. ...
Mukesh Kumar Yadav and anr Vs. Govt.of Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: January 07, 2013 + W.P.(C) 55/2013 MUKESH KUMAR YADAV AND ANR ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.Rajender Yadav, Advocate versus GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Zubeda Begam with Ms.Sana Ansari, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) CM No.116/2013 For the reasons stated in the application, 101 days delay in refiling the writ petition is condoned. CM No.115/2013 For the reasons stated in the application, the exemption as prayed for is granted. W.P.(C) 55/2013 & CM No.114/2013 1. The facts are not in dispute.2. Responding to the advertisement No.04/2007 issued by D.S.S.S.B., claiming to OBC candidates, petitioners submitted their application and along therewith furnished a certificate not issued by the competent authority W.P.(C) 55/2013 page 1 of 3 at Delhi; and contrary to the directions contained in the advertisem...
Nirmal Vaid Vs. State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 1760/2012 NIRMAL VAID ..... Petitioner Through Mr. N. Hariharan, Mr. Utkarash and Mr. Dharmender, Advs. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through Mr. Navin Sharma, APP for the State. Complainant in person. CORAM: % HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR ORDER 07 01.2013 Crl.M.A. No. 19679/2012 Allowed subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. BAIL APPLN. 1760/2012 By this petition moved under Section 438 Cr.P.C. the petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail. As per the allegations leveled by the prosecutrix in the FIR the present petitioner happens to be the father of one of the prosecutrixs student, who used to visit her studio almost daily to pick his son from the dance class. It is further alleged that the petitioner representing Page 1 of 6 himself to be an event Manager, Film & TV show producer and Media coordinator assured the prosecutrix that he will give her a break in his film/serial a...
Rahul Gupta and anr Vs. Ashok Biswal and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-2013
$~12 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:07. 01.2013 + CS(OS) 312/2012 RAHUL GUPTA & ANR Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr.Ujjawal Jha, Advocate versus ASHOK BISWAL AND ANOTHER ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Pradeep Diwan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Aditya Singh and Mr. Aman Garg, Advocate For defendant no.1. Mr. Rajiv Aneja, Advocate for defendant no.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR 1 By this order, I propose to decide the preliminary issue no.1. By an order dated 13.08.2012, the following issues were framed:1) Whether the suit is barred limitation?2) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to seek relief of specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 02.08.2006 ?3) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to relief of mandatory injunction as prayed for? 4. whether the plaintiff is entitled to permanent injunction? 5. Whether the agreement to sell dated 2nd August, 2006 stood terminated and the amount forfeited by defendant No.1 on account of default in payment o...
- ‹ Prev
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- Next ›
- Last »