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.
Ram Singhasan Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-11-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on : April 05, 2013 Judgment Pronounced on : April 11, 2013 + WP(C) 407/2011 RAM SINGHASAN Represented by: .....Petitioner Ms.Avnish Ahlawat and Ms.Latika Chaudhary, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Jatan Singh, Advocate for R-1. Ms.Zubeda Begum, Advocate for R-2 to R-4. WP(C) 4709/2011 BANWARI LAL .....Petitioner Represented by: Ms.Avnish Ahlawat and Ms.Latika Chaudhary, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Ruchir Mishra, Advocate for R-1. Mr.Rajiv Nanda, Ms.Shawana Bari and Mr.Anas Tanvir, Advocates for R-2 to R-4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The above-captioned two writ petitions challenge the judgment and order dated January 06, 2010 passed in OA No.2769/2008 and OA No.2770/2008, dismissing both Original Applications filed by Ct.Banwari Lal and Ct.Ram Singhasan.2. Fo...
Radhey Lal Vs. State of Haryana and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-11-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7054/2003 % April 11, 2013 RADHEY LAL Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Rakesh Mudgal and Mr. Santosh Singh Advocates. versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Manish Kumar Bishnoi, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE 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 the petitioner Radhey Lal seeking reliefs that the respondent No.1/State of Haryana/Employer release to the petitioner his various retiral benefits. The defense of respondent No. 1 is that whatever amount has been withheld from the retiral benefits is on account of the claim for penal rent payable by the petitioner for the quarter/premises in which the petitioner over stayed as also an amount towards the water charges for that premises.2. The claim of the respondent for adjustment claimed can be understood by referring to the impugned order dated 30.01.2003, and therefore, the said order is...
Harish Kumar @ Pintu Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-11-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :11. h April, 2013 + CRL.A. 126/2011 HARISH KUMAR @ PINTU Through : ..... Appellant Mr.K.Singhal, Advocate. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Through : ..... Respondent Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(Open Court) 1. The appellant- Harish Kumar @ Pintu S/o Bedi Ram challenges judgment dated 16.08.2010 in Sessions Case No.89/2008 arising out of FIR No. 194/2004 PS Shahdara, by which, he and his associates were convicted and sentenced. The appellant was held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 392/394/411/34 IPC. Vide order dated 19.08.2010, he was sentenced to undergo RI for ten years under Section 394/34 IPC with fine ` 3,000/-.2. Allegations against the appellant were that on the night intervening 09/10.06.2004 at 12.30 A.M. near Hanuman Mandir, Shahdara, he and his associates Sanjay, Rohtash and Deepak S/o Babu Lal and Deepak Kumar @ Deepu robbed TSR driver- Krishan Dev Pathak of c...
M/S. Sesa Goa Limited and Another Vs. State of Goa, Through the Chief ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Apr-11-2013
Swatanter Kumar, (Chairperson) Challenge 1. The Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (for short Authority) vide its order dated, 4th March, 2011, took the decision and issued the following directions: 14. Decision of GCZMA:- GCZMA members deliberated on the points of reference made in the complaint made by Khemlo Sawant. From the documentation it is seen that, the jetties existed prior to 1991 and the activity of loading is an ongoing process at Amona. Proceedings to the hearing were referred to. It is observed that, M/s Sesa Goa has proceeded to rapidly expand their jetties without obtaining any prior approval from this Authority and other local Authority. At present the factual position appears that the jetties are more than double in area and this expansion is unauthorized. GCZMA Members also observed that the conveyor system is not authorized at site though there are NOCs or approvals from CoP or GSPCB. It is seen that M/s Sesa Goa has sought to submit a plan with its earlier rep...
Ms. Saroj Singh Vs. Commi. of Police, Police Headquarters and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Apr-11-2013
Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A): The applicant has sought the following relief:- (i) Declare the applicant as selected for the post of Sub-Inspector [Female][Exe] on the basis of her clearing the physical, written and medical tests; and (ii) To quash and set-aside the selection of ineligible candidates in pursuance to the SI (Executive)-Female-Recruitment 2009 and allow the OA with exemplary costs. To issue an offer of appointment to the applicant. Any other relief. Costs of OA may also be awarded to the applicant. 2. Facts of the case are that Delhi Police had advertised in 2009 82 vacancies of Sub-Inspector (Female) in Delhi Police. The advertisement stated that out of these posts 22 were reserved for OBC, 13 for SC, 4 for ST and 43 were for general candidates. The applicant was called for taking physical test and then the written test. The applicant cleared the written test and the result of successful candidates was displayed by Delhi Police on the internet wherein the applicants Roll ...
Harendra Pratap Singh Vs. Union of India Through Secretary, Ministry o ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Apr-11-2013
Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A): The applicant has sought the following relief:- (A) May quash and set aside impugned order dated 25.04.2012; (B) May direct the Respondents No. 1 and 2 to upgrade the pay scale of post of Assistant Editor (Hindi) (Now redesignated as Assistant Director (publicity) at par with Hindi Officer with effect from 01.01.2006 and pay the arrears of pay and other perks to the Applicant; (C) And, may pass such other further orders/direction deem fit and proper in facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the Applicant. (D) Allow the present application with costs. 2. Facts of the case are that applicant was a Hindi Journalist having worked as Senior Journalist with Nav Bharat Times (NBT) of The Times of India Group, thereafter in the audio/visual medium with Doordarshan and All India Radio and for a year with Dainik Jagran. He was selected for appointment as Assistant Editor (Hindi) in 1998 by UPSC on the gazetted post in the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500/- as per...
Umed Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:3. d April, 2013 Pronounced on:10. h April, 2013 + CRL.A. 78/2012 DALIP SINGH Through: ..... Appellant Mr.V.K.Malik, Advocate with Mr. Rahul Raj Malik, Advocate Versus STATE OF (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State + CRL.A. 239/2012 BIJENDER SINGH Through: ..... Appellant Mr.V.K.Malik, Advocate with Mr. Rahul Raj Malik, Advocate Versus STATE Through: + ..... Respondent Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State CRL.A. 240/2012 UMED SINGH Through: ..... Appellant Mr.V.K.Malik, Advocate with Mr. Rahul Raj Malik, Advocate Versus STATE Through: + ..... Respondent Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State CRL.A. 241/2012 RAJINDER SINGH Crl.A. 78/2012 Etc ..... Appellant Page 1 of 12 Through: Mr.V.K.Malik, Advocate with Mr. Rahul Raj Malik, Advocate versus STATE OF DELHI Through: + ..... Respondent Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State CRL.A. 242/2012 SAJJAN SINGH Through: ..... Appellant Mr.V.K.Malik, ...
Mohan Singh and ors Vs. State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :06. h February, 2013 DECIDED ON :10. h April, 2013 + CRL.A.245/2007 MOHAN SINGH & ORS. ..... Appellants Through : Mr.Gaurav Bhattacharya, proxy counsel for Mr.Ajay Verma, Advocates. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Fizani Husain, APP for the State. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Mohan Singh (A-1), Kalyan Singh (A-2) and Gopal Singh (A-3) were arrested in case FIR No.109/1995, Police Station Paschim Vihar for committing offences punishable under Section 304/279/34 IPC. The case was registered on Paramjit Singhs statement (Ex.PW-15/A). He disclosed to the police that on 19.02.1995 at about 06.30 P.M., the bus not DL-P-6655, in which they were travelling, reached near Peeragarhi Chowk, Rohtak Road, a tempo bearing not DL-ILA-3544 overtook the bus from wrong side and hit it. The tempo halted at the red light, Peeragarhi Chowk. He, his father-Trilochan Singh, Manoranjan Singh and Gurjeet Singh alighted...
Wishwa Mittar Bajaj and Sons Vs. Uoi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % RESERVED ON:25. 02.2013 PRONOUNCED ON:10. 04.2013 + FAO(OS) No. 224/2009 WISHWA MITTAR BAJAJ & SONS ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Raghavendra M. Bajaj, Advocate. versus UOI ..... Respondent Through: Mr. R.V. Sinha, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT 1 The appellant (hereafter the claimant) is aggrieved by the judgment and order of a learned Single Judge, allowing the respondents Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, (the Act) setting aside an award, made in its (i.e the appellants) favour.2. The Appellant was awarded a lump sum contract, for construction of infrastructure for breeding and training of dogs at RVC Centre and School at Meerut. The total contract sum was ` 2,79,44,098.10 and work was to be completed by 15.04.2003. It was completed on 12.04.2003 and the Appellant submitted the final bill. FAO (OS) 224/2009 Page ...
Haryana Roadways Delhi Vs. Sushila Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-10-2013
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:10. h April, 2013 % + MAC.APP. 528/2011 & CM No. 11130/2011 HARYANA ROADWAYS DELHI ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Yashpal Rangi, Advocate. Versus SUSHILA DEVI & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Vikas Yadav and Ms.Upma Yadav, Advocates for Respondent Nos. 1 to 5. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) MAC.APP. 528/2011 1. The instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 11.01.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted compensation as under:1. Loss of Income : Rs.16,71,705/2. Love & Affection : Rs. 50,000/3. Loss of Estate : Rs. 10,000/4. Loss of Consortium : Rs. 10,000 5. Funeral expenses : Rs. 20,000/____________________________________________ Total : Rs.17,61,705/(Rupees Seventeen Lacs Sixty One Thousand Seven Hundred Five only) ______________________________________________ 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has mainly argued that the respondent No....
- ‹ Prev
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- Next ›
- Last »