Delhi Court March 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.
State Vs. Dilbagh Rai Bhola and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-2013
$-22 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL. L.P. NO.47 OF 201.Date of decision :13. h March, 2013 % STATE Through : ..... APPELLANT Ms. Richa Kapoor, APP SI Jagdeep Malik, P.S. Geeta Colony. versus DILBAGH RAI BHOLA AND ORS. ..... RESPONDENTS Through : Mr. Dinesh Garg, Adv. for R-1 to R-4 and R-6. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA GITA MITTAL, J.(Oral) 1. The record of the lower court has been received. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. The instant petition has been filed under Section 378(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the State seeking leave to appeal against the judgment dated 25 th May, 2010 passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge (East) FTC, E-Court Karkardooma Court, Delhi in Sessions Case No.81/09.2. The case arose from FIR No.167/2002 registered by the police under Sections 304/498A/406/120B/34 of IPC which was registered by the police station Geeta Colony. One Sh. Roshan Lal, resident of Jind, Haryana had ...
Rahul JaIn Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-2013
$~49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on :13th March, 2013 % + W.P.(C) 6457/2012 RAHUL JAIN Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. S. S. Pandey, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Ankur Chhiber, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The petitioner impugns the order of the Armed Forces Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the AFT) dated 30th July, 2012 rejecting his application. The petitioner was commissioned in the Infantry, Unit No.10, Garhwal Rifles, after completing the training in the National Defence Academy and Indian Military Academy. It is stated that at the time of recruitment, the Army was aware that the petitioner was a heavily built individual and a Boxer of national repute. He weighed 80 kg. against the ideal weight of 67 kg. Between 1993 and 2008, he served his Unit. It is also stated that the petitioner was given posting in the field ar...
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Nilofar Currimbhoy
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Crl. M.C. No.2110/2010 + Date of Decision:13. h March, 2013 # ! ASSTT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX...Petitioner Through:Mr. Tiger Singh, Advocate Versus $ * NILOFAR CURRIMBHOY .Respondent Through: Mr. H.R.Khan Suhel, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K.BHASIN ORDER P.K. BHASIN, J: The respondent was discharged by the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi vide order dated 22nd August,2008 for the commission of the offence punishable under Section 276-CC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the complainant(Income Tax Department) had failed to establish in its pre-charge evidence adduced by it in its complaint case(being Complaint Case no. 35/1999) that her failure to submit the income tax return for the assessment year 1994-95 was wilful. That decision of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was affirmed by the Sessions Court vide order dated 29th September,2009 when it was challenged by the compla...
Sh. Satya Prakash Vs. the Secretary to the Govt. of India and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-2013
Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A): 1. This O.A. has been filed by the applicant seeking the following relief:- (i) to quash and set aside the order No. 14013/3/2009-Vig. dated 03.11.2010, Annexure A-1 passed by respondent No.3. to quash and set aside the order No.40-176/2010 ICFRE dt. 16.06.2011, Annexure A-2 and order No.40-176/2010-ICFRE dated 29-102011, Annexure A-3 passed by respondent No.2. To direct the respondent to promote the applicant to the post of UDC from the date from which his next junior was promoted to the post of UDC and grant arrears of pay etc. from the date of promotion. To direct the respondent to grant financial upgradation to the applicant under Assured Carrier Progression Scheme (ACP) and Modified Assured Carrier Progression Scheme (MACPS) from the date from which he became eligible for the same. To direct the respondent to pay arrears as a result of reliefs (iii) and (iv) alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date the same became admissible till t...
Babul Lal Yadav Vs. Union of India Through Its Secretary and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-2013
G. George Paracken: 1. In this Original Application, Applicant has challenged the Annexure A-1 Memorandum No.V-15014/SSF/ZONE-I/DISC/MAJ/2008-121 dated 04.03.2008 proposing to hold an enquiry against him under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, Annexure A-2 Memorandum No.V-15014/SSF/DISC/BLY/2010-5613 dated 26.10.2010 issued by the Disciplinary Authority disagreeing with the findings of the Inquiry Officer, Annexure A-3 Memorandum No.V-15014/SSF (FSY)/Disc./Major/2010-95 dated 16.12.2010 inflicting the punishment of compulsory retirement from service upon him with 2/3rd Pension and Gratuity benefits with immediate effect and the Annexure A-4 Appellate Order No.A-44011/01/2006-SSO dated 3.11.2011 by which the Appellate Authority, after considering the appeal of the Applicant, enhanced the punishment under Rule 11 (xi) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and imposed upon him the penalty of dismissal from service. 2. Along with the Annexure A-1 Memorandum dated 04.03.2008, the Disciplinary Author...
Sushila Devi Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi Through Commissioner of Police
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-2013
G. George Paracken: 1. The applicant in this case is the legal heir and widow of Shri Madho Singh, Ex-Constable in Delhi Police who was dismissed from service on 10.03.2011 and later died on 16.07.2011. Her grievance is against the Annexure A-1 findings of the inquiry officer dated NIL holding that the charge of habitual absence against her late husband was proved, the Annexure A-2 order of the disciplinary authority dated 10.03.2011 dismissing him from service and the Annexure A-3 appellate order dated 14.07.2011 rejecting his appeal against the aforesaid order of the disciplinary authority. Therefore, the reliefs sought for by the applicant in this case are the following:- 1. To call for the records of the case and quash/set aside the impugned orders mentioned in Para-1 of O.A., direct the respondents to grant death-cum-retirement benefits to the applicant with all consequential benefits. Or alternatively Direct the respondents to convert the punishment of dismissal into that of comp...
Laxmi Chand Vs. Gnct of Delhi Through Commissioner of Police and Anoth ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-13-2013
G George Paracken, Member (J): 1. The applicant in this Original Application has sought directions to set aside the impugned Annexure A-1 (Colly) orders dated 02.03.2012 and 06.03.2012. By the order dated 02.03.2012, the Respondents have (i) cancelled the admission of the Applicant to Promotion List D-1 (Executive) with effect from 13.02.2009 issued earlier vide Headquarters Notification dated 19.02.2009; (ii) admitted him to Promotion List D-1 (Executive) with effect from 01.05.2007 and his name was placed at Sl.No.7A above the name of HC (Executive) Sukhbir Singh; (iii) admitted him to Promotion List D-II (Executive) with effect from 06.05.2008 as he had passed the Intermediate School Course with effect from the said date, in terms of Rule 15(i) of Delhi Police (Promotion and Confirmation) Rules, 1980; (iv) promoted him to officiate in the rank of ASI (Executive) with effect from 06.05.2008 granting notional promotion, after adjusting the sums already paid to him with the stipulat...
Savita Bhatnagar and ors Vs. the Managing Committee St. Sophia Sr. Sec ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) 1240/2010 12th March, 2013 SAVITA BHATNAGAR & ORS Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Preet Pal Singh and Mr. Achal Gupta, Mr. H.K.Shekhar, Advocates. versus THE MANAGING COMMITTEE ST. SOPHIA SR. SEC. SCHOOL & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Vinay Kr. Garg, Adv. for R-1 and 2. Ms. Reeta Kaul, Adv. for R-3 and R4/GNCT. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM No. 9483/2011 (for direction) This application is allowed and the writ petition is restored for hearing. CM stands disposed of. CM No. 2392/2013(u/o 1 R 1.CPC by petitioner) This is an application for adding one Ms. Neelam Sahani as a petitioner in the writ petition. Since the applicant is praying the same relief as the other petitioners, the application is allowed. Amended memo of parties be filed within one week. CM stands disposed of. W.P.(C) no. 1240/2010 1. By this writ petition, the petitioners are praying ...
Arjun Sher Gill Vs. Saba Begum
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + R.S.A. NO.26/2013 Decided on:12. h March, 2013 ARJUN SHER GILL Through: Appellant Mr. G.S. Sharma, Adv. Versus SABA BEGUM Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(Oral) This is a regular second appeal. The appellant has not been able to show to the Court that any substantial question of law is involved in the matter. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondent, Saba Begum had filed a suit for possession and mesne profit against the appellant in respect of property bearing not K-73, 3rd Floor, Near Jagatram Park, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi with covered area measuring 75 sq. yds. consisting of two bedrooms, one drawing-cum-dining room, kitchen, toilets and bathroom. The trial Court after completion of the pleadings and hearing the parties had passed a judgment and decree dated 11.5.2012 in favour of the respondent. Apart from this, a decree for a sum of Rs.90,000/- being the arrears of rent w.e.f. May, 2008 till November...
Pacific Convergence Cororation Ltd. Vs. Data Access (India) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CO.PET. No. 292 of 2004 Reserved on: February 25, 2013 Decision on: March 12, 2013 PACIFIC CONVERGENCE CORPORATION LTD. .... Petitioner Through: Mr. Arjun Pall, Advocate. versus DATA ACCESS (INDIA) LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Y.P. Narula, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aniruddh Chaudhary, Advocate for Canara Bank. Mr. Anuj Aggarwal and Mr. Gaurav Khanna, Advocates for DAVP. Ms. Manini Brar, Advocate for Blue Bird Advertising (P) Ltd. Ms. Padma Priya with Mr. Mukesh Kamal and Ms. Meenakshi Sood, Advocates for Infinity Advertising Services (P) Ltd. Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Advocate for the Official Liquidator. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUDGMENT 12 03.2013 Co. Appl. Nos. 908 of 2007, 480 of 2008, 1702 of 2009, & 151 o1. These applications arise out of orders passed by the Court in Company Petition No. 292 of 2004 seeking the winding up of the Respondent Data Access (India) Limited (DAIL). The subject matter of the present order concerns the payment...
- ‹ Prev
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- Next ›
- Last »