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.
Sh. Hukam Chand Kamra Vs. Smt. Shilpa
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2013
.* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Order delivered on: December 16, 2013 CM(M) No.955/2013 & C.M. No.14404/2013 (for stay) SH HUKAM CHAND KAMRA ..... Petitioner Through Ms.Sagari Dhanda, Adv. versus SMT SHILPA Through ..... Respondent Mr.S.Satyanarayana, Adv. along with respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The petitioner, Hukam Chand Kamra (respondent before the learned trial Court) has challenged the order dated 30 th July, 2013 whereby the petitioners application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC for rejection of the petition was dismissed.2. The fact of the matter is that:- (a) Smt.Shilpa, respondent herein has filed a petition for claiming of her minor child, namely, Master Tushar who is now residing in the custody of his grand-father, i.e. petitioner herein, in Bhiwani, Haryana. (b) The marriage between Smt. Shilpa and Sh. Gulshan Kamra son of the petitioner, was solemnized on 22nd June, 2003 in Haryana. Out of the wedlock, th...
Css Deopa Vs. Uoi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:16. 12.2013 + W.P.(C) 1464/2011 CSS DEOPA ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Ankur Chibber, Adv. versus UOI AND ANR ..... Respondents Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(Oral) W.P.(C) 1464/2011 & CM Nos. 3106/2011 & 9532/2012(both applications for stay) The petitioner, who is the proprietor of M/s. Jai Malanath Security Services was empanelled with the Directorate General of Settlement on 21st November, 2005. The said empanelment was renewed on 12 th December, 2007. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said empanelment was open ended in the sense that it was not to expire in a particular time period. Vide communication dated 27th January, 2011, issued by Joint Director (Employment), the petitioner was disempanelled, for violation of para 37(b) of DGR instructions. Being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs:(a) Issue writ of certiorari...
G.S. Phalahari Vs. Chairman-cum-md Cement Corpn. India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.4204/2000 & C.M. No.10594/2002 % December 16, 2013 G.S. PHALAHARI Through: None ......Petitioner VERSUS CHAIRMAN-CUM-MD CEMENT CORPN. INDIA LTD. Through: None CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA ...... Respondent To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The following reliefs are claimed in the writ petition: (i) (ii) (iii) 2. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ/direction by directing the respondent to grant the petitioner ex-gratia payment of difference of pay on revision of I.D.A. pay scales from 1.1.1992 for the number of months of service left before his respective date of retirement and gratuity with continuing of service rendered in various organisation of Ministry of Industry, dept. of Public enterprises. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order direction and may quash the O.M.No.PD/PP/13 (62) 94/949 dated 17.4.1996 and letter dated 18.2.1997, written by respondent, wherein ...
Sri Sai Institute of Teacher Education Vs. National Council for Teache ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:16. 12.2013 + WP(C) No.5805 of 2013 SRI SAI INSTITUTE OF TEACHER EDUCATION ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Sharawat & Mr. Ankit Gyan, Advs. versus NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGEMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(Oral) The petitioner before this Court applied to the NCTE on 3.10.2011 to commence D.El.Ed. Course, with an intake of 50 seats, in the academic year 2012-2013. Vide letter dated 26.3.2012, the petitioner was informed that the application was found deficient on the following points: The institution has not submitted approved building plan. The approved building plan indicating Khasra No./Plot No.of land, total build up area, name of the institution, name of proposed course, and the proposed course is required with clear demarcated total area of propose course. Notarized copy of change of land use certificate issued under c...
Tushar Sharma Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA9222013 TUSHAR SHARMA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. K.C. Mittal with Ms. Ruchika Mittal, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. B.V. Niren, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Atul Kumar, Advocate for R-2. Mr. Harsh Kaushik, Advocate for R-3. Reserved on :6. h December, 2013 Date of Decision:16. h December, 2013 % CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: CM APPL. 19354/2013 in LPA9222013 Allowed, subject to just exceptions. LPA9222013 1. Present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 22nd November, 2013 passed by learned Single Judge whereby appellants writ petition being W.P.(C) 6268/2011 was dismissed. The relevant portion of the impugned order is reproduced hereinbelow:- "6. The All India Quota which was fixed at 30% of the total seats in Pradeep Jain (supra), was later on changed to 15% of the total seats in Dr. Dinesh Kumar and others ver...
Rajiv Kumar Damani Vs. M.M.T.C. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:16. h December, 2013 % + RFA No.674/2002 RAJIV KUMAR DAMANI Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Praban K. Sharma, Adv. Versus M.M.T.C. LTD. Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Ashok Chhabra, Adv. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.CM No.13084/2013 (of the appellant for restoration of the appeal dismissed in default on 22.01.2013), CM No.13086/2013 (of the appellant for condonation of 43 days delay in applying for restoration) & CM No.13084/2013 (of the appellant for condonation of 69 days delay in refiling the application).1. Though no cause for non appearance when the appeal was dismissed in default and no ground for delay in applying for restoration was found but since the appeal had been admitted for hearing and had remained pending for long in this Court, it was felt that it should be considered on merits, subject of course of the appellant depositing the balance decretal amount in this Court and being at...
Sunil Gupta Vs. Harish Karra (Karta Huf)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:16. h December, 2013 % + RFA No.581/2013 SUNIL GUPTA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Amrit Pal Singh, Adv. Versus HARISH KARRA (KARTA HUF) ..... Through: None. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW Respondent RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J1 The appeal impugns the judgment and decree dated 03.08.2013 (of the Court of Additional District Judge (ADJ) (Central-07), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in civil suit No.378/2012 filed by the respondent) of recovery of Rs.7,50,000/- along with interest at 9% per annum from the date of institution of the suit till realization and costs against the appellant consequent to the dismissal of the application under Order 37 Rule 3(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 filed by the appellant for leave to defend.2. Though this is a First Appeal and comes up before this Court for the first time today but considering the nature of the controversy and since the appellant along with the memorandum of appeal...
Mohinder Singh Vs. D.V.B. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2013
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No.5725/1999 % December 16, 2013 MOHINDER SINGH Through: ......Petitioner Mr.Anuj Sharma with Mr. M.K. Bhardwaj, Advocates. VERSUS D.V.B. & 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. 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 which neither gives reasons for disagreeing with the findings and conclusions o...
Ajay Pal Singh Vs. B.S.E.S. Yamuna Powers Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2013
R-163 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.17339/2004 16th December, 2013 % AJAY PAL SINGH ..... Petitioner Through: None Versus B.S.E.S. YAMUNA POWERS LTD. Respondents Through: Mr. Sandeep Prabhakar, Mr. Amit Kumar, Mr. Vikas Mehta, Advocates CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Three reliefs are claimed against the employer in this writ petition by the petitioner who is the son of late Smt. Raj Kumari, who was working as Water Woman, and who died in harness on 18.7.1997. The first relief is for payment of death benefits. The second relief is for payment of pension. W.P.(C) No.17339/2004 page 1 of 4 The third relief is for compassionate appointment.2. So far as the death benefits are concerned, petitioner is entitled to grant of death gratuity. As per the letter of Delhi Transco Ltd. (original respondent No.1) dated 3.5.2005, which is filed as Annexure R-1 with its affidavit, petitioner is enti...
Gurvinder Singh Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 659/2011 Judgment delivered on: December 16, 2013 GURVINDER SINGH Through ..... Appellant Mr. K. Singhal, Advocate versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through ..... Respondent Ms. Richa Kapoor, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR JUDGMENT KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.1. By this appeal filed under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.), the appellant seeks to challenge the impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 07.03.2011 and 08.03.2011, respectively whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Rohini District Court, Delhi has convicted the appellant for committing an offence punishable under Sections 376/365/323 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as I.P.C.) and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life together with imposition of fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »