Delhi Court April 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. J.P.Pandey and ors. Vs. M/S Hindustan Prefab Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No. 2564/2013 22nd April, 2013 SH. J.P.PANDEY & ORS. Through: ......Petitioners Mr. R.K.Kaushik, Advocate. VERSUS M/S HINDUSTAN PREFAB LTD. & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Mr. Amrit Pal Singh, CGSC for R-2 & 3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition is filed by six petitioners who have retired from the respondent no.1/Hindustan Prefab Ltd. Though it is not clear who superannuated naturally, and who had taken voluntary retirement, however, it is not disputed that all the petitioners have retired from respondent no.1 in 2008.2. The prayer in the writ petition is for grant to the petitioners of pay revision benefits as per notification of the Ministry of Finance dated 29.8.2008 and the Office Memorandum dated 14.10.2008 issued by the Ministry of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises. Reliance is finally placed upon the circular of the respond...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. M/S Sigma Corporation India Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on: April 22, 2013 CEAC 11 2004 COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE ..... Appellant - versus M/S SIGMA CORPORATION INDIA PVT LTD .... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case:For the Appellant : Mr Satish Kumar, Sr. Standing Counsel For the Respondent : Ms.Amita Gupta, Advocate CORAM:HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MS JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J 1.This is an appeal under Section 35 G(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the final order dated 16th January, 2004 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) whereby the appeal of the respondent against the order dated 8 th May, 2003 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) directing the respondent to pay Merchant Overtime Tax Charges (in short referred to as MOT charges) of ` 3,37,900/- has been allowed and the demand raised has been set aside.2. Br...
Pritam Ashok Sadaphule Vs. Hima Chugh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + C.R.P.148/2011 % Date of Decision: April 22, 2013 PRITAM ASHOK SADAPHULE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Rakesh Taneja, Advocate versus HIMA CHUGH .... Respondent Through: Mr.Prashant Mendiratta, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.* 1. By this revision petition challenge has been made to order dated 22nd September, 2011 passed by the ld.Addl. District Judge-1, New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in HMA No.15/2011 whereby the application of the petitioner/husband under section 13 of the CPC has been dismissed.2. Briefly the facts relevant for the disposal of the present petition are as under:The parties met each other in England in the year 2004 and developed liking for each other. On 5th March, 2005, both got married at New Delhi. After about one week of marriage, they went back to England on 12th March, 2005. With the passage of time, disputes and differences arose between them as a result of which they...
National Investor Forum Regd. Vs. Golden Forests India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:22. 04.2013 + W.P.(C) 1399/2010, C.M. APPL.4324/2010, 4325/2010, 6975/2012, 11128/2012, 11229/2012, REV. PET. 160/2013, C.M. APPL. 2053/2013 & 3279/2013 NATIONAL INVESTOR FORUM REGD. ... Petitioner Through : Sh. Ajay Majithia, Sr. Advocate with Sh. S. Bhowmick, Advocate, in Rev. Pet. 83/2013. versus GOLDEN FORESTS INDIA LTD. ..Respondent Through : Sh. Harpavan Kumar Arora and Sh. Saurabh. S. Sinha, Advocates, for the Committee GFIL. Sh. Satish Kumar and Sh. Ashok Arien, Advocates, for DC, SSP (Indore) and Sh. Rajkumar Haldar, Tehsildar, Kshipra, in C.M. No. 2053/2013. Sh. Shailendra Bhardwaj and Ms. Aroma. S. Bhardwaj, Advocates, for Golden Forests India Ltd. (5) Sh. Akshat Goel, Advocate, for petitioner/applicant in C.M. Appl. 11128/2012 and Resp. No.1 in C.M. Appl. 6975/2012. Sh. Rajeev Saxena and Ms. Toshika. K., Advocates, for the applicant in C.M. Appl. 6975/2012. Sh. Rajesh Banati, Advocate, for applicant in C.M. Appl. 43...
VipIn Malik Vs. the Institute of Chartered Accountant of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2013
$~A32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date:22. d April, 2013 + LPA 240/2013 VIPIN MALIK Through ..... Appellant Mr. V.P. Singh, Sr. Adv. With Mr.Ashish Mahija and Ms.Yukti Gupta, Adv. Versus THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through Mr. J.S. Bakshi and Mr. A.S. Bakshi, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) CM No. 6364-6365/2013 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. LPA 240/2013 1. By the present appeal the appellant seeks to impugn the order dated 08.04.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the application for stay being CM No. 4199/2013 has been dismissed.2. By the writ petition the appellant impugned a communication dated 08.03.2013 issued by the respondent whereby the respondent decided to cause further enquiry by the Disciplinary Committee on the specific issue stated. It is the contention of the appellant that for the first time he received a letter date...
Vinod Tyagi Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2013
$ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :20. h February, 2013 DECIDED ON :22. d April, 2013 + CRL.A. 292/2004 VINOD TYAGI Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Harish Parashar, Advocate with appellant in person. versus THE STATE Through : ..... Respondent Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Aditya Singh, Advocate. AND CRL.A. 374/2004 RAJIV KUMAR versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Vinod Tyagi (A-1) and Rajiv Kumar (A-2) challenge the judgment dated 03.03.2004 in Sessions Case No.117/2002 arising out of FIR No.140/2000 registered at Police Station S.N.Puri by which they were held guilty for committing offence punishable under Section 307/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for five years with fine `5,000/- each.2. Daily Diary (DD) No.30-B (Ex.PW4/1) was recorded at Police Station S.N.Puri, New Delhi on 25.04.2000 at 03.50 P.M. on getting information from duty Constable Santosh Kuma...
Rajpal Singh Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2013
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : April 22, 2013 + W.P.(C) 6195/2012 RAJPAL SINGH Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.V.P.S.Tyagi, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Ms.Barkha Babbar, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG , J.(Oral) 1. Vide impugned order dated March 23, 2012, review whereof was declined vide order dated July 24, 2012, which order is also under challenge, the Tribunal has required the respondent to re-consider the matter pertaining to recovery of excess payment if any made to the petitioner after June, 1998; returning a determinative finding that when he joined service in the Corps of EME of the Indian Army in the year 1987, petitioner would be entitled to be placed in the pay scale `950-1500, later on revised to `30504500, and thus first ACP benefit would entitle him to be placed in the pay scale `4000-6000. Petitioner was claiming a right t...
Santosh Kumar Arya Vs. the Chief Secretary Govt. of Nct and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-22-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) Nos.1093/2012 and 1095/2012 % 1. April 22, 2013 W.P.(C) No.1093/2012 SANTOSH KUMAR ARYA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. K.K. Jha, Advocate. versus THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF NCT & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Jagdeep Sharma, Advocate.2. W.P.(C) No.1095/2012 SH. AVNISH KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. K.K. Jha, Advocate. versus THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF NCT & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Jagdeeep Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) WP(C) Nos.1093 & 1095 o1. of 3 W.P.(C) No.1093/2012 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner involving Rule 110 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 seeking re-employment for a period of two years on his retirement on 31.12.2010.2. Admittedly, the date of retirement of the petitioner is 31.12.2010 and therefore if the petitioner wanted re-employment for two years from the date of his...
Roopa Sharma Vs. Manoj Kumar Gupta and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2013
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:18. h April, 2013 + MAC.APP. 891/2011 & CM. NO. 18539/2011 ROOPA SHARMA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Amit Kr. Pandey, Ad. versus MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Suresh Sharma, Adv. for R1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated 21.03.2011 whereby, ld. Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition filed by the appellant.2. Ld. Tribunal has passed the aforementioned order on recording that appellant was partially cross-examined, thereafter, she did not tender herself for further cross-examination in spite of the directions of the court. Even on request of the mother of the appellant, the matter was adjourned for completing the evidence, however, in spite of that she did not appear.3. The evidence of the appellant was closed on 11.08.2009. The appellant neither move any application nor made herself availabl...
Apeejay School Vs. Suresh Chander Kalra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-18-2013
$~R-5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Dated:18. h April, 2013. % + LPA 349/2008 APEEJAY SCHOOL Through ..... Appellant Mr.H.L.Tikku, Senior Advocate with Ms. Yashmeet, Advocate Versus SURESH CHANDER KALRA ..... Respondent Through Mr.Ankur Arora, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) 1. By this Appeal the petitioner Apeejay School seeks to challenge the Order of the learned Single Judge dated 30.05.2008 whereby the Order dated 17.12.2007 of the Delhi School Tribunal was upheld. The Delhi School Tribunal vide its said order directed that the respondent was an employee of the appellant i.e. Apeejay School, Sheikh Sarai-I, New Delhi and he continues to be an employee of the appellant. The Tribunal hence rejected the contention of the appellant that the respondent had abandoned the job and directed that the appellant be allowed to join his service and he would be entitled to arrears of salary alongwith other consequential b...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »