Delhi Court October 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.
J.K.Mittal Vs. Central Information Commission and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision:28. 10.2013 W.P.(C) No.6755/2012 J.K.MITTAL .... Petitioner Through:Petitioner in person with Mr.Varun Gaba, Advocate versus CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION AND ANR ..... Respondents Through:Mr.Amrit Pal Singh, CGSC for R.2 with Mr.Naresh Kumar, Dy. Registrar, CESTAT in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN V.K. JAIN, J.(ORAL) The petitioner before this Court filed an application dated 4 th February, 2012 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of Central Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) seeking certain information. Alleging that the CPIO had failed to provide information sought in terms of the aforesaid application, the petitioner filed a complaint before the Central Information Commission under Section 18 read with Section 20 of the Right to Information Act, seeking imposition of penalty against the said CPIO under Section 20 of the Act. In the aforesaid complaint, the petitioner clearly...
Mahinder Gupta Vs. Commissioner of Delhi Police
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:28. 10.2013 + W.P.(C) 6758/2013 KALI CHARAN Through: versus + ..... Petitioner Mr. Tarun Sharma, Adv. COMMISSIONER OF DELHI POLICE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Zubeda Begum, Standing Counsel with Ms. Sana Ansari, Advs. W.P.(C) 6781/2013 MAHINDER GUPTA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Tarun Sharma, Adv. versus COMMISSIONER OF DELHI POLICE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Zubeda Begum, Standing Counsel with Ms. Sana Ansari, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(Oral) The respondent-Commissioner of Police, Delhi invited applications for grant of temporary licences for selling fire crackers in Delhi during the period from 11.10.2013 to 05.11.2013. The petitioners before this Court applied for grant of such a licence in terms of Rule 113 of the Explosives Rules. The application of the petitioners for grant of such licence were, however, rejected vide two separate orders both dated 24.10.2013 on the ground that...
Bharat Kumar Bhartee Vs. the Vice-chancellor and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:28. 10.2013 + WP(C) No.6614 of 2013 BHARAT KUMAR BHARTEE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Jaya Goyal, Ms. Manpreet Kaur & Ms. Ashima Puri, Advs. versus THE VICE-CHANCELLOR & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Adv. for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(ORAL) The petitioner before this Court took admission in the M-Phil Course of the Jamia Millia Islamia University in the academic year 2011-2012. Vide letter dated 9.6.2011 issued by the University Grants Commission, the petitioner was sanctioned Rajiv Gandhi National Fellowship for SC candidates to pursue M. Phil/Ph.D. courses in terms of UGC guidelines on the subject. The petitioner, however, failed in Arabic in the first year of M. Phil Course. However, he was promoted to second year of the aforesaid Course, despite the fact that he had obtained 20 out of 100 marks in Arabic. This obviously was in terms of the Rules of the University ...
M/S Good Will Enterprises Vs. M/S Feron Life Science (P) Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:28. 10.2013 ARB.P. 174/2013 M/S GOOD WILL ENTERPRISES ..... Petitioner versus M/S FERON LIFE SCIENCE (P) LTD ..... Respondent ADVOCATES WHO APPEARED IN THIS CASE: For the Petitioner: Mr. Shinoj K. Narayanan, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Vijendra Kumar, Advocate CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J1 This is a petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act). It appears that the petitioner had approached the High Court of Kerala in the first instance. The Kerala High Court vide order dated 22.02.2013 returned the petition filed by the petitioner herein under Section 11(5) of the Act on the ground that, that court did not have jurisdiction in the matter and that in view of the agreement obtaining between the parties, in particular, clause 15 of the said agreement, the appropriate court to entertain such a petition would be this court.2. It is in these...
Tilak Raj Tanwar Vs. D.D.a
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:28. h October, 2013 + W.P.(C) 6295/2012 TILAK RAJ TANWAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Rajesh Dagar, Advocate with Mr. Swastik Singh, Advocate versus D.D.A Through: ..... Respondent M. Arjun Pant, Advocate for R-1. Ms. Sangeet Sondhi, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL JUDGMENT G.P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayer:writ(s), order(s) and direction(s) in the appropriate nature directing the respondent no.1 to allot the alternative residential DDA flat to the petitioner in view of the scheme known as Evictees of Mahavir Enclave-III2004...
Chandana Bandyopadhyay Vs. Shyama Prasad Vidyalaya Sr. Secondary Schoo ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.6764/2013&conn. % + 28th October, 2013 W.P.(C) 6764/2013 CHANDANA BANDYOPADHYAY Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. R.K.Saini and Ms. Seema Salwan, Advocates. Versus SHYAMA PRASAD VIDYALAYA SR. SECONDARY SCHOOL & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Vinod Wadhwa, Adv. for R-2 and 3. + W.P.(C) 6776/2013 M.S. VERMA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. R.K.Saini and Ms. Seema Salwan, Advocates. versus SHYAMA PRASAD VIDYALAYA SR. SECONDARY SCHOOL & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Vinod Wadhwa, Adv. for R-2 and 3. + W.P.(C) 6778/2013 UMA MITRA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. R.K.Saini and Ms. Seema Salwan, Advocates. versus SHYAMA PRASAD VIDYALAYA SR. SECONDARY SCHOOL & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Vinod Wadhwa, Adv. for R-2 and 3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By these writ petitions, the petitioners who retired as teachers from the respondent no.1-school, see...
Aftab Ahmad and Sikender Vs. Kanti Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order pronounced on: October 28, 2013 + RC. Rev. No.396/2013 AFTAB AHMAD AND SIKENDER ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Manish Sharma, Adv. versus KANTI DEVI ..... Respondent Through None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) CM No.16949/2013 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of. RC.REV. 396/2013 & CM No.16948/2013 1. The petitioner-tenant filed the present rent revision under Section 25(B) (i) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the impugned order dated 6th July 2013 passed by learned Appellate Court of Sh. J.R. Arya, Karkardooma Court dismissing the Rent Appeal No.RCT302012 of the petitioner against the eviction order passed, observing that the appeal is without merit and that the eviction order suffers from no illegality.2. Brief facts relevant for adjudication are: i. The respondent in this case filed an eviction petition unde...
B.S.Chowdhary Vs. Delhi Financial Corporation and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.722/2008 28th October, 2013 % B.S.CHOWDHARY Through: ......Petitioner Mr. U.S.Chaudhary and Mr. Vipin Chaudhary, Advocates. VERSUS DELHI FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND ANR. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rajat Aneja and Mr. Govind Kumar, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner impugns the action of the employer/respondent no.1/Delhi Financial Corporation for issuing a second charge-sheet dated 14.11.2007, although, there was an earlier enquiry report with respect to a charge-sheet dated 21.12.2004 exonerating the petitioner on more or less the same set of allegations. Effectively, the petitioner pleads the bar of double jeopardy or bar of conducting of a fresh enquiry on the basis of a new charge-sheet containing allegations in the old charge-sheet, on account of general principles...
Jasvir Singh Vs. Director General Indo Tibetan Boarder Police (itbp
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5631/2013 Date of decision:28. h October, 2013 % JASVIR SINGH ..... Petitioner Through: Dr.Sriniwas Rao & Mr.Vivek Sheel, Advocates. versus DIRECTOR GENERAL INDO TIBETAN BOARDER POLICE (ITBP) FORCE & OTHERS ..... Respondents Through: Ms.Barkha Babbar, Adv. for UOI CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA GITA MITTAL, J.(Oral) 1. By way of the present writ petition the petitioner has assailed the order dated 18th December, 2012 whereby the respondents terminated his service as a Constable (General Duty) with the Indo Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) during his probation.2. The petitioner was recruited pursuant to an offer of appointment dated 12th December, 2011 which contains the following caution:If any declaration made or information furnished by you found false or it is found that you have suppressed any vital information then you will be liable to be terminated from the service or any action which w...
Ravinder Vs. Addl.Commissioner of Police (Licensing)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-2013
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: October 28, 2013 + W.P.(CRL) 806/2013 RAVINDER Through: ..... Appellant Mr.J.K. Chawla Ms.Shisba Chawla, Advs versus ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (LICENSING)..... Respondent Through: Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. for State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(Oral) In this case the petitioner was granted an Arms licence in the year 1998 bearing No.EDAN/7/1998/9 for 7.62 mm (30 mouser) pistol and .315 bore rifle, which was valid for the area of Delhi and the State of U.P. The licence had been renewed from time to time till it was cancelled /revoked by the respondent vide its order dated 5.9.2011. An appeal filed before the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi was also dismissed on 12.9.2012, which has led to the filing of the present writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of cancellation / revocation was passed pursuant to a show cause notice dated 21.6.2011. As per the show cause notice, the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »