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.
Employees State Insurance Corp. Vs. M/S Unicop Technologies Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.132/2013 & CM 4219-4221/2013 Decided on :12. h April, 2013 EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORP. Appellant Through: Mr.Yash Tandon for Mr.Bhupesh Narula, Advocate. Versus M/S UNICOP TECHNOLOGIES LTD. Through Nemo Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant against the order dated 27.9.2011 by virtue of which the demand raised by the appellant against the respondent has been quashed and the matter was remanded back to the appellant/corporation for the purpose of reassessing the liability of the respondents, keeping in view the documents which are sought to be produced by the respondents.2. The issue which was involved in the matter was with regard to the non-payment of the contribution payable by the respondent under ESI Act. It was alleged by the appellant corporation that on the date of inspection, the respondent company was having more than 20 employees drawing wages less than o...
N.K.Saxena and ors. Vs. Govt. of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4164/2008 & W.P.(C) 5292/2006 % + 12th April , 2013 W.P.(C) 5292/2006 N.K.SAXENA & ORS. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Arvind Nayar with Mr. Zeyaul Haque, Advs. versus GOVT. OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Shobhana Takiar, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Siddharth Dias, Adv. for R-2. Mr. Ashwani Bhardwaj, Adv. for R-3. And + W.P.(C) 4164/2008 DR.J.B.BABBAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Arvind Nayar with Mr. Zeyaul Haque, Advs. versus GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Mamta Tandon & Mr.Yogesh Saini, Advs. for Mr. V.K.Tandon, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Siddharth Dias, Adv. for R-2. Mr. Apar Gupta, Adv. for R-3. 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 was heard at length not only today but also on two earlier dates viz. on 29.01.2013 and 28.02.2013.2. The petitioners in these cases are employees of the resp...
Raghubir Singh and ors Vs. Mauji Ram and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.274/2007 Decided on :12. h April, 2013 RAGHUBIR SINGH & ORS. Appellants Through: Mr.K.K.Jha, Advocate. Versus MAUJI RAM & ORS. Through Mr.Sanjay Rathi, Advocate Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a regular second appeal filed by the appellants against the judgment dated 28.7.2007 passed by the learned ADJ by virtue of which the first appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned counsel for the respondents.3. The main contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the regular second appeal involves a substantial question of law as to whether the civil court has the jurisdiction to entertain the suit itself in view of Section 185 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954(hereinafter referred to as the Act). He has sought to place reliance on case titled Hatti Vs. Sunder Singh 1970(2) SCC 84.and Rajender Singh Vs. Vijay ...
Basudev Garg Vs. Commissioner of Customs
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:12. 04.2013 CUS.A.A. 7/2010 BASUDEV GARG ... Appellant ... Respondents ... Appellant ... Respondents ... Appellant ... Respondents ... Appellant ... Respondents versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND + CUS.A.A. 10/2010 & CM No. 21740/2010 ARUN GUPTA versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS + AND CUS.A.A. 12/2010 & CM No. 21751/2010 ANIL GOEL versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS + AND CUS.A.A. 13/2010 & CM No. 21754/2010 ANIL GOEL versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellants For the Respondent : Mr C.Hari Shankar and Sh. S.Sunil. : Mr.Kamal Nijhawan, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr.Sumit Gaur, Advocate. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J 1.These appeals are directed against the order dated 15th March, 2010 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. In all these appeals, the common issue that has been sou...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Parma Nand
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA 65/2013 and CM No.1520/2013 & 1521/2013 DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Appellant Through:Mr.Anish Dhingra with Mr.Anand Mishra for Ms.Avnish Ahalawat, Advocates. versus PARMA NAND ..... Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN % 1. ORDER 12 04.2013 The respondent before us was working as a Conductor with the appellant/Delhi Transport Corporation. The charge sheet dated 13 th November, 1994 was served upon the respondent for not issuing tickets to four passengers even after collecting fare from them. Pursuant to an inquiry held against the respondent, an order was passed removing him from the service of the appellant. An industrial dispute was raised by the respondent, disputing his removal from LPA No.65/2013 page 1 of 3 service. The Labour Court, vide Award dated 7 th October, 2004 directed reinstatement of the respondent with full back wages and other consequential benefits with continuity...
R.K. Verma Vs. Union of India Through Secretary Ministry of Urban Deve ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Apr-12-2013
V. Ajay Kumar, Member (J): MA No.270/2011: 1. This MA has been filed seeking condonation of the delay in filing the OA No.422/2010. It is submitted that after the disciplinary, appellate and review orders, the applicant wrongly pursued the revision which was dismissed by an order dated 18.05.2010 on the ground that the same is not provided under the provisions of Delhi Development Authority (CDA) Regulations, 1999, and hence, the delay in filing the OA is neither willful nor wanton. In this view of the matter, and in the interest of justice, the delay is condoned and the MA is allowed. OA No.422/2011: 1. The applicant was served with a charge memorandum dated 05.09.2003 (Annexure A5), containing the following charge: Shri R.K. Verma, Junior Engineer (C) while working in Eastern Division No.5 during 2000 did not hand over the physical possession of Flat No.34-A, Pocket-6, Kondli Gharoli to its allottee in time after having received the possession letter dated 20.8.99 from the Housing De...
Hannan Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-11-2013
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 773/2010 Reserved on:6. h February, 2013 Decided on:11. h April, 2013 % HANNAN ..... Appellant Through Mr. S.K. Sethi, Adv. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through Mr. Manoj Ohri, APP. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 By the present appeal, the Appellant impugns the judgment dated 26th March, 2010 whereby the Appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) NDPS Act for illegal possession of 40 kgs of Ganja and the order on sentence dated 29th March, 2010 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs. 1 lakh and in case of default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months.2. Learned counsel for the Appellant contends that no independent public witness was associated with the recovery, despite the recovery being from a crowded place. The narration of the events is highly improbable as no person would be standing with such a huge qua...
Hamdard Laboratories India and anr Vs. Director General of Income Tax ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-11-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:11. h April, 2013 + WRIT PETITION (C) 3598/2012 HAMDARD LABORATORIES INDIA AND ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Parag P. Tripathi, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Simran Mehta, Mr.R.M.Mehta & Ms.Yogita, Advs. versus DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Sanjeev Rajpal, Sr. Standing Counsel. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL SANJIV KHANNA, J.The petitioner No.1 Hamdard Laboratories (India), stated to be a trust, has filed the present writ petition for issue of writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing order dated 22.02.2012 passed by respondent No.1/Director General of Income Tax (Exemptions) under Section 10(23C)(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act for short).2. The petitioner Nos.1 claims that it is governed by a Constitution dated 28.8.1948 and were/are dedicated to business of manufacture of sale of unani medicines for the purpose of ...
M/S. Fortunex Limited Vs. M/S. Koutons Retail India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-11-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:11. h April, 2013. + CS(OS) 2213/2010 M/S. FORTUNEX LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Sudhanshu Batra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Lokesh Bhola and Mr. Vishnu Anand, Advocates. Versus M/S. KOUTONS RETAIL INDIA LTD. ..... Defendant Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW JUDGMENT 11 04.2013 % 1. The plaintiff seeks a decree for recovery of Rs.1,45,15,753/- along with pendente lite and future interest at 18% per annum pleading: (i) that the defendant, being one of the leading retailers and well reputed fashion wear brand in India in May-August, 2008 placed orders on the plaintiff for purchase of 49,152 number of mens corduroy trousers and for 31,440 number of mens shirts for a total consideration of United States Dollar (USD) 265,189.52 and USD 161,789.70 respectively; (ii) the plaintiff agreed to supply the said garments through its suppliers M/s. Sterling Apparels Ltd. and M/s. Sirina Garments & Textiles Ltd. bein...
Sh. M.L. Aggarwal Vs. Cement Corporation of India Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-11-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.9281/2009 % April 11, 2013 SH. M.L. AGGARWAL Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Vikram Nandrajog, Advocate. versus CEMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Arun Birbal, Advocate for respondent No.1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The facts of the present case show that when organizations want to harass and victimize their employees they will not stop at all. The facts of the present case show such amount of obduracy, lack of bonafides and unfairness on the part of the respondent No.1-organization that judicial conscience of this Court is shocked. The disquiet in the mind of this Court is extenuated by the fact that the petitioner-employee has been forced to resort to repeated litigations, and admittedly that too in a matter where petitioner is guilty at best of a procedural lapse and the loss to the employer-organization is ...
- ‹ Prev
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- Next ›
- Last »