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.
Capt. Anirudh Tyagi Vs. Indian Airlines Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.2599/1996 % March 12, 2013 CAPT. ANIRUDH TYAGI Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. S.N. Gupta, Advocate. versus INDIAN AIRLINES LTD. Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Bhavna Dhami, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition, the petitioner, a Pilot, seeks various reliefs, but, they are essentially one of being paid compensation of `50,000/- per month, and which was being given to other Pilots as stated in the order dated 30.8.1995 of the respondent. For the sake of record, I note that though the relief clauses are worded in a particular manner, in essence counsel for the petitioner states that claim of the petitioner is limited to this claim of compensation of `50,000/- per month.2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was a Pilot with the respondent and was flying aircrafts Boeing-737. The petitioner as also other Pilots were thereafte...
S. K. JaIn Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-xi, New Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:12. 03.2013 W.P.(C) 7551/2012 S. K. JAIN .......Petitioner versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-XI, NEW DELHI & ORS. .......Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Mukesh Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms Suruchi Aggarwal, Sr. Standing Counsel for Revenue. Ms Archana Gaur, Advocate. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR JUDGMENT R.V.EASWAR, J 1.The writ petition is admitted to hearing and with the consent of the counsel for both sides the matter was heard finally for disposal.2. The petitioner is assessed to income tax. On 16.02.2005 a search under section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was conducted at his residential premises in the course of which cash amounting to `8,83,800/- was found. Out of the cash found an amount of `6,33,800/- was seized. The petitioner attempted to explain the source of the cash found i...
Samarth Shiksha Samiti (Regd.) and ors. Vs. Brij Bala Gupta and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Reserve:04. h March, 2013 Date of Pronouncement:12. h March, 2013. + LPA No.681/2008 SAMARTH SHIKSHA SAMITI (REGD.) & ORS. .... Appellant Through: Mr.Puneet Taneja and Mr Dheeraj Pandey, Advs. Versus BRIJ BALA GUPTA & ANR. ... Respondents Through: Mr.Gyan Prakash and Mr.S.Chander, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN : D.MURUGESAN, CHIEF JUSTICE 1 This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order allowing the writ petition filed by respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as the teacher) whereby the appellants were directed to place the teacher in the senior scale of TGT (Head Mistress) as per the circular dated 12.08.1987 with effect from 01.07.1993 and also to extend the benefit of replacement scale with effect from 01.01.1996.2. The short question that arises in this appeal is as to whether the teacher would be entitled to the benefit of senior of pay scale applicable to trained graduate teac...
Bihari Lal and anr. Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : February 18, 2013 DECIDED ON : March 12, 2013 + CRL.A.227/1996 BIHARI LAL & ANR. ..... Appellants Through : Mr.R.K.Bali, Advocate. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through : Mr.H.J.S.Ahluwalia, Spl.P.P. for the State. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Appellant-Bihari Lal impugns judgment dated 04.10.1996 in Sessions Case No.9/1996 arising out of FIR No.426/1984 registered at Police Station Kalyan Puri by which he was convicted for committing offences punishable under Section 148 and 395 IPC read with Section 149 IPC. Vide order dated 05.10.1996 he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years with total fine of `30,000/-.2. Allegations against the accused were that on 01.11.1984 at about 09.00 P.M. near House No.396, Block No.21, Trilok Puri, he, Daulat Ram, Rajjan, Mahesh, Raju and other unknown persons formed an unlawful assembly, the object of which was to kill people, loot and burn their h...
Nazir Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order reserved on:07.03.2013 Order pronounced on:12.03.2013 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1169/2011 NAZIR Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Ajay Verma with Mr. Shiv Kumar Dwivedi, Advocates. versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.CRL.M.A.12912/2012 1. The present order will dispose of the above application under Section 7A of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (Act, for short) read with Rule 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 (Rules, for short). The application has been filed by Nazir, who has been convicted under Section 363, 364, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short). He was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default thereof simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. He was sentenced to r...
Rekha Rani Vs. Vinod Juyal and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:12.03.2013 FAO(OS) 140/2013 REKHA RANI Through ..... Appellant Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Ravi D. Sharma, Advs. Versus VINOD JUYAL & ORS. Through ..... Respondents Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(Oral) CM No. 4276/2013 (exemption) 1 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM No. 4277/2013 (condonation of delay of one day in filing) 2 In view of the averments contained in the instant application, delay of one day in filing the appeal is condoned. 3 Application stands disposed of. FAO(OS) No.140/2013 4 The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 23.01.2012 whereby his application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the said Code) seeking a rejection of the plaint had been dismissed and rightly so. 5 Record shows that the present suit has been filed for cancellation of a sale dee...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Ashok Kumar Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:12. 03.2013 W.P.(C) 7661/2010 DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Petitioner versus ASHOK KUMAR SHARMA ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Ms Avnish Ahlawat, Ms Latika Chaudhary, Mr Nilesh Singh and Ms Nazoo Sharma. For the Respondent : Respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J 1.The Petitioner herein has challenged the order dated 01.07.2010 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A No. 1592 of 2009 wherein the Tribunal has allowed the petition.2. In brief, facts relevant for the adjudication of the present petition may be noted as under:- (i) The Respondent joined DTC as Dy. Vigilance Officer and on 20.01.1989 was promoted as Dy. General Manager (Personnel) which post was re-designated as Dy. Chief General Manager (Personnel). (ii) A Memorandum of Charge dat...
Mcd and anr. Vs. Mrs.Raj Bala Mann and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
$~6-10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : March 12, 2013 + W.P.(C) 1461/2012 MCD & ANR. Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.Gaurang Kanth, Advocate versus MRS. RAJ BALA MANN & ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.S.M.Dalal, Advocate. W.P.(C) 2441/2012 MCD Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Gaurang Kanth, Advocate versus KAMLESH KUMARI & ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.S.M.Dalal, Advocate. W.P.(C) 2476/2012 MCD Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Gaurang Kanth, Advocate versus KAMAL DEVI & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.S.M.Dalal, Advocate. W.P.(C) 2628/2012 MCD Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Gaurang Kanth, Advocate versus SMT. VANITA TREHAN & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.S.M.Dalal, Advocate. W.P.(C) 2638/2012 MCD & ANR. Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.Gaurang Kanth, Advocate versus KUSUM KUMARI Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.S.M.Dalal, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. J...
Savitri Devi Vs. Uoi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No. 16818/2006 12th March, 2013 SAVITRI DEVI ...... Petitiner Through: Mr. Harish Pandey, Adv. VERSUS UOI & ANR. ...... Respondents Mr. Sachin Datta, Adv. for R-1. Through: Mr. Satyendra Kumar, Adv. for Mr. Sanjeev Kr. Gupta, Adv. for R-2. 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, the petitioner who is a widow of one Sh. K.P.Mishra, seeks compassionate employment with the respondent no.2/Dena Bank either for herself or her daughter.2. The respondent no.2-bank had filed counter-affidavit and stated that the present case is not a case of an employee dying while in service with the respondent no.2, but the case is a case where the employee had abandoned his services with the respondent no.2. It is stated in the counter-affidavit that the husband of the petitioner on account of failure to join duties was issued notices, for rejoining his duties, w...
Vigneshwara Development Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Narender Gupta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:12. 03.2013 + RFA(OS) 85/2012 & CM No.16543/2012 VIGNESHWARA DEVELOPMENT PVT LTD & ANR ..... Appellants Through : Mr. Naveen Sharma, Adv. versus NARENDER GUPTA ..... Respondent Through : Mr. S. Khan, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % 1. The appellant, the unsuccessful defendant before the learned Single Judge, questions the impugned decree dated 13.8.2012, in Civil Suit No.114 of 2010. The suit had claimed decree for possession, damages, mesne profits for use and occupation of the premises being G-20, Aggarwal Cyber Plaza, Netaji Subhash Place (herein after called the suit premises). The appellant had entered into a lease with the plaintiff/owner of the suit premises ( Respondent in this case). He had executed a registered lease deed in favour of the appellant on 20.12.2007 for 33 months with a lock in period of 11 RFA(OS) 85/2012 Pag...
- ‹ Prev
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- Next ›
- Last »