Delhi Court December 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.
Canara Bank Vs. M/S Pick Up Auto Products
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:17. h December, 2013 % + RFA3182012 & CM No.12925/2012 (of appellant u/O6R-17 CPC). CANARA BANK ..... Appellant Through: Mr. K.K. Nirmal, Adv. Versus M/S PICK UP AUTO PRODUCTS Through: None. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW ..... Respondent RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 The appeal impugns the judgment and decree dated 4th February, 2012 of the Court of the Addl. District Judge (Central-07), Delhi of dismissal of Suit No.147/2010 filed by the appellant Bank for recovery of Rs.3,55,728/from the respondent / defendant.2. Notice of the appeal and of the application for condonation of 73 days delay in filing of the appeal and of the application for amendment of the plaint was issued. The said notice was returned back with the report of no such company in existence at the address given. Liberty was given to the appellant/plaintiff Bank to serve the respondent at a fresh address. Vide order dated 30th July, 2013 the respondent/def...
V.P. Sunita Vs. Dda
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:17. h December, 2013 + W.P.(C) 7602/2010 V.P. SUNITA Through: ..... Petitioner Ms. Richa Kapoor, Adv. with Ms. Karuna Chhatwal, Adv. versus DDA Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Manika Tripathy Pandey, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL JUDGMENT G.P. MITTAL, J.1. By virtue of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks restoration of allotment and handing over the possession of the MIG Flat No.239, (Ground Floor), Sector 14, Pocket B, Phase-2, Dwarka, New Delhi as the entire payment of the flat has already been made to the DDA.2. On 29.12.1989, the Petitioner applied for allotment of an MIG flat under the Ambedkar Awas Yojna being a member of Scheduled Caste category. She paid a sum of `12,200/- as registration and processing fee and was allotted Registration No.9335 and Priority No.5881. On 31.12.2002, the Petitioner was declared successful in the draw of lots and was allotted the ...
Smt. Satya Singh and ors. Vs. Family Planning Association of India and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.6118/2000 17th December, 2013 % SMT. SATYA SINGH AND ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners None. Versus FAMILY PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF INDIA AND ANR. Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition, petitioners claim the relief of gratuity and provident funds from their employer/respondent no.1/Family Planning Association of India.2. Respondent no.1 has filed its counter-affidavit in which in para 16 it is stated that it has framed separate service rules concerning the employees working in the branch of the respondent no.1 as a private body vis-a-vis those working under Government funded project. The case of the petitioners is decided under Rule 43 of the General Rules and Service W.P.(C) No.6118/2000 page 1 of 4 Regulations of the respondent no.1. It is further pleaded that respondent no.1 has amended the rules keeping in view...
Tek Bahadur Vs. Ram Bharose and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:17th December, 2013 + MAC.APP. 472/2011 TEK BAHADUR Through ..... Appellant Mr. F.K. Jha, Advocate versus RAM BHAROSE & ORS Through + ..... Respondent Mr. Anand Vardhan Sharma, Adv. with Mr. V.S. Vashdev, Adv. for R-3. MAC.APP. 504/2011 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Through Mr. Anand Vardhan Sharma, Adv. with Mr. V.S. Vashdev, Adv. versus TEK BAHADUR & ORS Through ..... Respondent Mr. F.K. Jha, Advocate for Respondent No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.1. These two Appeals arise out of a judgment dated 23.02.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT-03, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi) (the Claims Tribunal) whereby a compensation of ` 12,34,260/was awarded in favour of Tek Bahadur, for having suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 29.01.2009.2. MAC APP.472/2011 has been preferred by Tek Bahadur (hereinafter referred to as the Claimant) for enhancement o...
Prem Chand Vs. Indraprastha Generation Co. Ltd (Genco)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5628/2000 % December 17, 2013 PREM CHAND ......Petitioner Through: None VERSUS INDRAPRASTHA GENERATION CO. LTD (GENCO) Through: None CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA ...... Respondent To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Yesterday in W.P.(C) No.5725/1999 titled as Mohinder Singh vs. DVB & Ors., I passed the following order:1. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that in the present case Inquiry Officer gave his report dated 15.3.1996 exonerating the petitioner. It is argued that no doubt the disciplinary authority has powers to disagree with the findings and conclusions of the Inquiry Officer, however, it is necessary that a speaking order has to be passed as to why the disciplinary authority differs with the findings and conclusions of the Inquiry Officer, and which has not happened in the present case, inasmuch as, the disciplinary authoritys order dated 03.7.1998 is a non-speaking order...
Dr. Shashi Ranjan Gupta Vs. M/S Spraylac Paints Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2013
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:27. 08.2013 Judgment delivered on:17. 12.2013 CS(OS) No.1019/2009 and I.A. No.5351/2011 DR. SHASHI RANJAN GUPTA Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. Vijay K. Gupta, Mr. Mehul Gupta & Mr. Sandeep Kaushik, Advocates. versus M/S SPRAYLAC PAINTS CORPORATION ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Sudhanshu Batra, Senior Advocate along with Ms. Kamlesh Mahajan, Advocate for defendant No.1. Mr. Peeyoosh Kalra, Advocate for defendant No.2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. The two plaintiffs, namely, Dr. Shashi Ranjan Gupta and Mr. Sunil Kumar Gupta, have filed the present suit to seek a declaration that defendant No.1 M/s Spraylac Paints Corporation a partnership firm of four partners who are named in the memo of parties (hereinafter referred to as Spraylac) has impliedly surrendered the lease in respect of premises bearing Municipal No.M-42, Connaught Circus, New Delhi, having an approximate area of 1000 sq...
Nanak Chand Vs. Dda
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on:17. h December, 2013 + W.P.(C) 8017/2012 NANAK CHAND ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. R.K.Saini, Adv. with Ms. Seema Salwan, Adv. versus DDA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Arun Birbal, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL JUDGMENT G.P. MITTAL, J.1. By virtue of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks allotment of a similar MIG Flat as Flat No.188, (FF), Pocket-B, Sector 13, Dwarka allotted to him was cancelled without any just and reasonable ground.2. At the time of hearing of the writ petition, Mr. R.K.Saini, learned counsel for the Petitioner conceded that if the Petitioner is found to be entitled to a similar flat now, he (the Petitioner) has no objection in accepting the allotment at current cost.3. The Petitioner got himself registered for allotment of an MIG flat under the Ambedkar Awas Yojna. He was allotted the Registration No.6362. At the time of registration, he gave his...
Mrs. Achala Kukreti Vs. Ndmc and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No.1730/2000 17th December, 2013 MRS. ACHALA KUKRETI Through: ......Petitioner None. VERSUS NDMC & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Issue in this writ petition, of the petitioner claiming post of Vice- Principal since 1990 in Navyug School run by the respondent no.7-Navyug School Education Society has recently been decided by me in the case of Mrs. Neelam Kaushal Vs. New Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors. in WP(C) 1876/2000 decided on 11.12.2013.2. In this judgment, I have held that entitlement which arises in around 1990 when the junior middle schools were upgraded to middle level Navyug Schools, and whereby petitioner could have claimed that post of Head Principal as happened in the Peshwa Road Branch Navyug School, could only have been enforced if the petitioner would have approached this Court in around the year...
Director Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Vs. Subramanian Swamy
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Order delivered on: December 17, 2013 + C.R.P. 58/2012 & CM No.7881/2012 DIRECTOR INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELHI ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Arjun Mitra, Adv. versus SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY Through ..... Respondent Dr.Roxna S. Swamy, Adv. with Mr.Ishkaran Singh Bhandari, and Ms.Supriya Manan, Advs. with respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. Brief facts are : a) The plaintiff who is respondent herein has filed the suit seeking recovery of salary and allowances in revised grade from 12 th December, 1972 the date of illegal termination till 21st May, 1991 the date of acceptance of resignation by the defendant alongwith interest @ 18% per annum, w.e.f. 20th February, 1991 till the date of payment of pension and gratuity to be paid as per today against the defendant. b) On 22nd April, 1970 an Office Memo bearing No.IITD/Estt-1/19- 70/948, dated 22nd April, 1970 appointing plaintiff as Visiting Staff M...
Babu Ram Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-2013
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.2568/2013 & CM No.4850/2013 Date of decision:17. h December, 2013 % ..... Petitioner BABU RAM Through: Mr.M.Rais Farooqui and Mr.S.A.Abdi, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.R.V.Sinha and Mr.P.K.Singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA GITA MITTAL (Oral) 1. The petitioner in the instant case has participated in the selection process for the post of SI/ASI in the Central Police Organization conducted pursuant to an advertisement dated 28th May, 2011 in the Employment News/Rozgar Samachar. It is undisputed that the petitioner was an ex-service man candidate who had applied in the Scheduled Caste category and is therefore entitled to age relaxation.2. The petitioner successfully participated in the written examination; physical efficiency test; medical examination as well as the interview. The grievance of the petitioner that despite his success...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »