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.
Ms Shoes East Ltd Vs. Krishan Lal Monga and Co and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2013
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:30. 10.2013 + CS(OS) 2146/2012 MS SHOES EAST LTD ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr Pavan Sachdeva, CMD of the plaintiff. versus KRISHAN LAL MONGA & CO & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Ms Manisha Agrawal Narain & Mr Neeraj Gupta, Advs. for D-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J (ORAL) 1. Service has been effected by way of publication, as noted in the order of the learned Joint Registrar dated 05.09.2013. There is no appearance on behalf of defendant nos. 1, 2, 4 & 5. The said defendants are, accordingly, proceeded ex-parte.2. Objections have been filed on behalf of defendant no.3, wherein a plea has been taken that defendant No.3 was never a partner of Krishan Lal Monga & Co., the partnership firm, with which the plaintiff dealt with. 2.1 It is further averred that the relationship between defendant No.3 and Krishan Lal Monga & Co. was on a principal-to-principal basis, and that, for some time defe...
Seema Dutta and ors. Vs. Ritesh Jha and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2013
$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:30. h October, 2013 MAC.APP. 3/2013 SEEMA DUTTA & ORS. ..... Appellants Represented by: Mr. M.K. Sinha and Ms. Vishakha, Advs. versus RITESH JHA & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Pramod Bahuguna and Ms. Kavita, Advs. for R1. Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Adv. for R3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 22.09.2012, whereby ld. Tribunal while awarding the compensation amount has deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased.2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the deceased left behind his legal heirs as under: a) b) c) d) e) MAC.APP. 3/2013 Seema Dutta (Wife) Alok Dutta (Son) Amol Dutta (Son) Tushar Dutta (Son) Smt. Chun Gi Dutta (Mother) - 42 28 21 19 - 70 Page 1 of 2 3. He submits that it is specifically mentioned in the affidavit filed by Seema Dutta, widow of the deceased that her ...
Raj Pal Kaur and ors. Vs. Pawan Gir and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2013
$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:30. h October, 2013 % + CM(M) 1187/2013 RAJ PAL KAUR & ORS. ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr. Navneet Goyal, Adv. versus PAWAN GIR & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Vaidant Chadha, Adv. for R3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) CM. No.17253/2013 (for exemption) Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. + CM (M) 1187/2013 1. Notice issued to respondent No.3.2. Ld. Counsel named above accepts notice on behalf of the said respondent.3. With the consent of the ld. Counsels for the parties, instant petition is taken up for final disposal.4. The petitioner is aggrieved with the impugned award dated 14.08.2013 whereby, ld. Tribunal while allowing the application under Section 151 CPC moved by the respondent No.3 / insurance company recorded as under:An application under Section 151 CPC has been moved for impleading driver of the TATA Ace N...
M/S. Manav Enterprises Vs. M/S. Rathi Steel and Power Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order pronounced on: October 30, 2013 + CM(M) No.1176/2013 M/S MANAV ENTERPRISES ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Chetan Sharma, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Santosh Chaurihaa, Mr.Ashutosh Dubey and Ms.Mohini, Advs. versus M/S RATHI STEEL & POWER LTD Through None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) CM No.17192/2013 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of. CM(M) No.1176/2013 & CM No.17193/2013 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 30 th September, 2013 passed by the learned Arbitrator in the arbitration proceedings between the petitioner and respondent on the application of the petitioner under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 questioning the authority, scope and jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal conducting the arbitration proceedings.2. Mr.Chetan Sharm...
National Investor Forum Regd. Vs. Golden Forests India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2013
$~8 & 9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :30. 10.2013 + W.P.(C) 1399/2010 NATIONAL INVESTOR FORUM REGD. ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee and Mr. S. Bhowmick, Advocates. versus GOLDEN FORESTS INDIA LTD. ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Shailendra Bhardwaj and Mrs. Aroma S. Bhardwaj, Advocates for R-1. Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, Advocate for SEBI. + W.P.(C) 1400/2010 NATIONAL INVESTORS FORUM ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee and Mr. S. Bhowmick, Advocates. versus GOLDEN FORESTS INDIA LTD. ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Shailendra Bhardwaj and Mrs. Aroma S. Bhardwaj, Advocates for R-1. Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, Advocate for SEBI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % CM No.7072/2012 1. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, SEBI is W.P.(C)1399/2010 & 1400/2010 Page 1 present and represented by Mr. Neeraj Malhotra. The Committee has filed an affidavit dated 23rd Octo...
Shri Ashok Kumar Bhilwaria Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.6410/1998 30th October, 2013 % SHRI ASHOK KUMAR BHILWARIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. G.D. Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocate. Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Through: Respondents Mr. Jagat Singh, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner questioning the action of the respondent no.1/erstwhile employer in not accepting his withdrawal of resignation but instead bringing about the termination of services of the petitioner w.e.f 15.5.1995 in the respondent-corporation pursuant to acceptance of the request made for resignation by means of the order dated 23.3.1995 of the respondent no.2/erstwhile employer.2. Before me, it is argued essentially that though the petitioner applied for resignation by his communication dated 1.3.1995, and which was accepted by the order dated 23.3.1995 of the res...
National Investors Forum Vs. Golden Forests India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2013
$~8 & 9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :30. 10.2013 + W.P.(C) 1399/2010 NATIONAL INVESTOR FORUM REGD. ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee and Mr. S. Bhowmick, Advocates. versus GOLDEN FORESTS INDIA LTD. ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Shailendra Bhardwaj and Mrs. Aroma S. Bhardwaj, Advocates for R-1. Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, Advocate for SEBI. + W.P.(C) 1400/2010 NATIONAL INVESTORS FORUM ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee and Mr. S. Bhowmick, Advocates. versus GOLDEN FORESTS INDIA LTD. ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Shailendra Bhardwaj and Mrs. Aroma S. Bhardwaj, Advocates for R-1. Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, Advocate for SEBI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % CM No.7072/2012 1. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, SEBI is W.P.(C)1399/2010 & 1400/2010 Page 1 present and represented by Mr. Neeraj Malhotra. The Committee has filed an affidavit dated 23rd Octo...
Dr. Veena Chaudhary Vs. the Director, Iit, Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.12183/2009 & CM Nos. 12398/2009 & 12712/2009 (Stay) 30th October, 2013 % DR. VEENA CHAUDHARY .... Petitioner Through: Ms. Jasvinder Kaur, Advocate. Versus THE DIRECTOR, IIT, DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Abhinav Mukherji and Ms. Purnima Krishna, Advocate for respondent No.1. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner by this writ petition impugns the action of the respondent No.1/IIT Delhi/employer in terminating her probationary services. The probationary services of the petitioner were terminated by the order dated 16.9.2009. Before me the following arguments have been urged on behalf of the petitioner to question the action of the respondent in terminating the services of the petitioner: (i) The first ACR with respect to the first period of work of the petitioner from 23.3.2007 till 31.12.2007 and extended upto 22.3.2008, which giv...
Anil Kumar Sharma Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2013
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6855/2013 C.M.No.14858/2013 Date of decision:30. h October, 2013 % ANIL KUMAR SHARMA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr.Azhar Qayum & Mr.D.V.Shukla, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Hashmat Nabi, Advocate for R-1 to R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA GITA MITTAL, J.(Oral) 1. By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner seeks issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to appoint him as a Class III employee in the position of Assistant Sub-Inspector or Class II to which he is eligible instead of Class IV employee. The petitioner is the son of Late Sh.B Raj Dayal Rai who was employed with the Border Security Force (BSF) and unfortunately suffered injury which required his discharge on 26th April, 1982 from service of the Force.2. On attaining age of 18 years, the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment with the Border Security Forc...
Man Mohan Batra and anr. Vs. Citizen Electronics Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-30-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order delivered on: October 30, 2013 + CM(M) 907/2013 MAN MOHAN BATRA & ANR ..... Petitioners Through Mr.B.B. Gupta, Adv. with Mr.Sarthak Ghonkrokta, Adv. versus CITIZEN ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. Through None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.(ORAL) 1. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 28th February, 2013 passed by the learned Additional District Judge whereby an application under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been dismissed.2. The relevant facts were as under :- (a) On 1st April, 1981 petitioner No.1 started the business of trading and manufacturing electrical and electronic items under the name and style of M/S Citizen Electronics with a trade mark Citizen. (b) In 1984, the petitioner No.1 converted the said sole proprietorship business into partnership busines...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »