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.
T.M.Sampath Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : March 08, 2013 + WP(C) 5124/2012 T.M.SAMPATH Represented by: ..Petitioner Petitioner in person versus UOI & ORS. Represented by: .....Respondents Mr.R.V.Sinha and Mr.A.S.Singh, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The petitioner appears to be spending his time in the corridors of the Central Administrative Tribunal as also the Delhi High Court evidenced by the fact he has embroiled his department, National Water Development Agency in as many as 16 writ petitions and 9 litigations before the Central Administrative Tribunal. The writ petitions filed by him are: W.P.(C) No.7662/2002, W.P.(C) No.4385/2003, W.P.(C) No.6972/2003, W.P.(C) No.488/2004, W.P.(C) No.2220/2005, W.P.(C) No.3629/2005, W.P.(C) No.14074/2006, W.P.(C) No.2644/2007, W.P.(C) No.5981/2007, W.P.(C) No.7509/2008, W.P.(C) No.7745/2008, W.P.(C) No.186/2009, W.P.(C) No.8052/2009, W.P.(C) No...
Ved Parkash Kharbanda Vs. Vimal Bindal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA No.83/2007 Date of decision :8. h March, 2013 % VED PARKASH KHARBANDA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajesh Katyal and Mr. S.S. Katyal, Advs. versus VIMAL BINDAL Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjay Jain, Sr. Adv. with Mr. R.N. Oberoi, Ms. Ruchi Jain and Mr. Sarfaraz Ahmad, Advs. CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA JUDGMENT 1 The appellant has challenged the judgment and decree for specific performance passed by the learned Trial Court. The appellant was the defendant and respondent was the plaintiff before the learned Trial Court. For the sake of convenience, the appellant and the respondent shall be referred to as per their ranks in the plaint as the defendant and plaintiff respectively.2. Plaintiffs case The plaintiff instituted a suit for specific performance, declaration and permanent injunction against the defendant on 21st August, 1997. The case set-up by the plaintiff in the plaint is as under:2.1 RFA No.83/2007 agreement with the...
Suresh Chand Gupta Vs. Mcd and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:8. h March, 2013 % + LPA 742/2012 SURESH CHAND GUPTA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Vinay Garg with Mr. Lalit Gupta & Mr. Deepak Agarwal, Advs. Versus MCD AND ORS Through: ..... Respondents Ms. Mini Pushkarna & Mr. S. Tyagi, Advs. for R-1&2. Mr. Nand Lal Kedia, Respondent No.5 in person (also represents R-4). CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.This intra-court appeal impugns the judgment dated 16th August, 012 of the learned Single Judge, of dismissal of W.P.(C) No.811/2002 preferred by the appellant. The said writ petition was preferred impugning the order dated 13th July, 2001 of the Additional District Judge exercising powers as an Appellate Authority under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 (PP Act) dismissing the appeal preferred by the appellant against the order dated 22 nd August, 1991 of the Estate Officer of the respon...
Ram Avtar Singh Vs. the Chairman and Managing Director, the Cwc and an
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.642/1994 % March 08, 2013 RAM AVTAR SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Manoj Swarup, Advocate with Ms. Latika Kohli, Advocate and Mr. Abhishek Swarup, Advocate. versus THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, THE CWC AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. K.K. Tyagi, Advocate with Mr. Iftekhar Ahmed, 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 challenges the impugned orders of the disciplinary authority and the appellate authority dated 3.6.1982 and 8.2.1985 respectively whereby the petitioner has been visited the penalty of termination from services.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues for setting aside of orders of the disciplinary authority and the appellate authority on the ground that at the stage of passing of the order by the disciplinary authority, the petitioner was not given any personal hearing and nor wa...
Shilpesh Chaudhary and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.1492 of 2013 Reserved on:6. h March, 2013. Pronounced on:8. h March, 2013. % SHILPESH CHAUDHARY AND ANR. Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Jaideep Malik along with Mr. Birender Sangwan, Advs. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Joginder Sukhija along with Mr. M.P. Singh, Mr. Yogesh Yogi and Mr. A. Mustafa, Advs. for R-1. Mr. Neeraj K. Kaul, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. Sai Krishna Rajagopal, Mr. Sidharth Chopra, Ms. Sneha Jain, Mr. Bhuvan Mishra and Mr. Nitesh Daryanani, Advs. for R-3/Fox Star. CORAM :HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN D. MURUGESAN, Chief Justice 1. This pro bono publico petition is filed by two Advocates practicing law within the vicinity of Delhi. They have prayed for the following reliefs: It is, therefore, humbly prayed that your Lordship may kindly be pleased to issue writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate Writ/Directions/Orders thereby directing Respondent NO.1 and 2 ...
Soci??t?? Des Produits Nestl?? S.A. and anr. Vs. N.D. Sharma and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
F-17 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 551/2010 SOCIT DES PRODUITS NESTL S.A. & ANR. Through: ..... Plaintiffs Mr. Hemant Singh with Ms. Mamta Jha and Mr. Manish Mishra, Advocates. versus N.D. SHARMA AND ANR. Through: ..... Defendants None. Date of Decision:08. h March, 2013. % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J (Oral):1. Present suit has been filed for permanent injunction restraining infringement and dilution of trade mark, passing off, unfair competition, rendition of accounts of profits, damages and delivery up.2. In the plaint it is stated that the plaintiff no. 1 is the proprietor of the trade mark / trade name / house mark NESTL which was adopted by Henry Nestle in 1866 and is today one of worlds leading nutrition, health and wellness Company. It is further stated that NESTL also forms a key and essential feature of all group companies as well as domain names used by the plaintiffs group companies.3. In the plaint it is stated that the p...
Dayal Singh Vs. D.T.C.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on: % + 11.02.2013 08.03.2013 W.P.(C) 7982/2009 DAYAL SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Mr. C.S. Rawat and Mr. Aman Nandrajog, Advocates. Through: ..... Respondent Mr. J.S. Bhasin & Ms.Rashmipriya, Advocates. versus D.T.C. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. By the present petition, the petitioner seeks the setting aside the order of removal dated 21.10.1994 issued by the respondent employer, and the award dated 16.09.1996 passed by the Labour Court, Fast Track-XXI, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi on the reference made by the Appropriate Government with regard to the petitioners removal from service. The Labour Court has held the petitioners removal from service as legal and justified.2. The petitioner was appointed as a bus conductor by the Respondent and was confirmed on successful completion of probationary period w.e.f. 03.09.1986. The petitioner was on duty...
Rakesh Kumar Gupta Vs. M/S Khushi Ram Bihari Lal Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI I.A. No.20367/2011 (by the plaintiff u/O IX R 9 CPC) and I.A. No. 20368/2011 (by the plaintiff u/S 5 of Limitation Act) in CS(OS) 1386/2009 Date of Decision:8. h March, 2013 IN THE MATTER OF RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. G.L. Rawal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kuljeet Rawal, Advocate versus M/S KHUSHI RAM BIHARI LAL LTD. & ORS. .... Defendants Through: Mr. Rajiv Nanda, Advocate with Ms. Shawana Bari, Advocate CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.(Oral) 1. The plaintiff has filed I.A. No.20367/2011 under Order IX Rule 9 CPC praying inter alia for setting aside the order dated 16.12.2010, whereunder the suit was dismissed in default. Alongwith the present application, the plaintiff has filed I.A. No.20368/2011 for condonation of delay of 357 days in filing an application under Order IX Rule 9 CPC.2. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the plaintiff states that in August 2009, the plaintiff had instituted the present s...
Ashok Kumar Vs. the State (Govt. of Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:8. h March, 2013 + CRL. M.C. 987/2013 ASHOK KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Ahuja, Adv. versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) ...... Respondent Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) CRL MA 3059/2013 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The Application is allowed CRL. M.C. 987/2013 1. The Petitioner invokes the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code) and seeks opportunity to recall PW-4 Dr. P.C. Prabhakar for further cross-examination.2. The ground taken up by the Petitioner for recalling PW-4 is that there are discrepancies in the testimonies of PW-4 and PW-13 viz. PW-4 examined the prosecutrix and observed bruises and scratches around the neck and front of chest, small abrasions over lower lip whereas PW-13 (IO) in his cross-examination stated that he did no...
Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Anita and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-08-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:8. h March, 2013 + MAC.APP. 228/2012 ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suman Bagga, Advocate versus SMT. ANITA & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Sudhir Nagar, Advocate for the Respondents No.1 to 5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J.(ORAL) 1. The Appeal is for reduction of compensation of `14,40,943/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) in favour of the Respondents No.1 to 5 for the death of Hari Om who died in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 21.02.2009.2. The finding on negligence reached by the Claims Tribunal is not challenged by the Appellant Insurance Company; thus the same has attained finality.3. On the quantum of compensation, the Respondents case was that the deceased was an agriculturist and he was earning `20,000/- per month from agriculture and `15,000/- per month from the business of dairy farming. Anita (PW1),...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »