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.
Mehtab Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + R.S.A. No.1 of 2012 & C.M. No.289/2012 Decided on :2. d April, 2013 MEHTAB SINGH Through: Appellant Mr. H.S. Dahiya, Advocate. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: Respondents Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI V.K. SHALI, J.(ORAL) 1. This is a regular second appeal under Section 100 CPC against the judgment and decree dated 28.8.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, (Central District 13), Tis Hazari Courts in R.C.A. No.91/2009 titled Union of India & Ors. vs. Mehtab Singh by virtue of which the judgment and decree dated 4.9.2009 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge cum Rent Controller, Central Delhi, was set aside and the suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff was dismissed.2. It may be pertinent here to mention that the appellant/plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration praying therein for setting aside his order of dismissal from service dated 21.7.2000 and the order of the appellate authorit...
Lalita and ors. Vs. State Govt. of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 103/2011 Reserved on:12. h February, 2013 Decided on:2. d April, 2013 % LALITA AND ORS. Through ..... Appellant Mr. Davinder Hora, Mr. Sikandar Khan, Advs. versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI Through ..... Respondent Mr. Manoj Ohri, APP with SI Abhishek Kumar, PS Prasad Nagar. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA 1 By the present appeal, the Appellants impugn the judgment dated 9th November, 2010 convicting the Appellants for offences punishable under Sections 498A/34 and 306/34 IPC and the order dated 16th November 2010 directing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years with fine of Rs. 10,000/- for offence under Section 306 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years with fine of Rs. 5000/- for offence under Section 498A IPC. In case of default in payment of fine the Appellants were directed to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months on each count.2. Learned counsel for the Appellants...
Subhash Chander Vs. Presiding Officer Labour Court
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision:02. 04.2013 % W.P.(C) 7316/2000 SUBHASH CHANDER Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Anil Mittal, Advocate versus PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sarfaraz Khan, Advocate with Mr. Mirza Amir Baig, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI VIPIN SANGHI, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to assail the order of removal from service dated 24.06.1987, passed by the respondent DTC; the order dated 25.08.1995, and; the final Award dated 06.05.1988 passed by the Labour Court IX in old I.D. No. 623/88 and new I.D. No. 586/94. By the order dated 24.06.1987, the petitioner was removed from service by the respondent DTC with immediate effect. By the order dated 25.08.1995, the preliminary issue with regard to the validity of the domestic enquiry held by the respondent against the petitioner was decided in favour of the respond...
Union of India Vs. M/S Tejinder Kumar Dua
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment pronounced on: April 2, 2013 + OMP No.142/2010 UNION OF INDIA Through ..... Petitioner Mr. V.K. Tandon, Adv. with Mr. Yogesh Saini Adv. versus M/S TEJINDER KUMAR DUA Through Dr. G.Lal Adv. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The present objections have been filed by the petitioner under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Award dated 20th November, 2009. The respondent raised certain disputes which were referred to the sole Arbitrator before whom the respondent filed its statement of claim. In response thereto the petitioner filed its statement of defence together with Counter claims. The respondent then filed its rejoinder and defence to the counter claims of the petitioner, where both the parties led their respective evidence after which the learned Arbitrator passed the impugned award wherein he also awarded interest @...
Kartar Singh Vs. M/S Mirkana Engineering Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Pronounced on: April 02, 2013 + ARB.P. No.98/2012 KARTAR SINGH Through ..... Petitioner Dr.Vijendra Mahndiyan, Adv. with Ms.Pallavi Awasthi, Adv. versus M/S MIRKANA ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr.Vikas Arora, Adv. with Mr.Mohit Taneja, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is owner of a plot measuring 4200 sq. yds. located at Khasra Nos.115 and 116, Jagatpur, Wazirabad Road, Delhi-110084.2. The respondent is the authorized dealer of M/s Tata Motor Limited for passengers vehicles and required space for carrying out its activities such as stockyards/body shop/workshop and as such approached the petitioner to lease out his aforesaid plot for the said purpose.3. A lease deed dated 29th April, 2009 was entered into between the parties. As per the terms and conditions of the said lease deed, there was a lock-in period of three years and no pa...
Gita Gupta Vs. Kailash Chand Dhingra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on :April 2nd, 2013 % + RC.REV. 581/2012 GITA GUPTA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.R.M.Sinha, Advocate versus KAILASH CHAND DHINGRA ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Ganesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.1. By way of this revision petition filed under proviso to sub-section (8) of section 25(B) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), petitioner/tenant has challenged the order dated 12 th September, 2012 passed by the ld.ARC, East Delhi District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby the leave to defend application filed by her in the eviction petition, has been rejected.2. An eviction petition under section 14(1)(e) read with section 25(B) of the Act was filed by the respondent herein i.e. owner wherein it is alleged that respondent is the owner/landlord of property no.E-4/17, Krishna Nagar and the petitioner herein i.e. respondent before the ld.ARC is his tena...
Devender Kumar Bhardwaj Vs. Yogesh Chander Bhardwaj and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
19 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 584/2013 & I.As. 5158-5161/2013 DEVENDER KUMAR BHARDWAJ ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Jahanvi Worah, Advocate. versus YOGESH CHANDER BHARDWAJ & ORS Through None ..... Defendants Date of Decision:2. d April, 2013 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present suit has been filed for partition, declaration and permanent injunction.2. By virtue of the present suit, plaintiff has sought a declaration that the Relinquishment Deed dated 15th October, 2007 be declared null and void.3. The only averment on the basis of which annulment of the aforesaid Relinquishment Deed is sought is in para 5 of the plaint which reads as under:5. That in terms of the family settlement, the defendant no.1 arranged for the execution of relinquishment deeds in respect of the suit property whereby the defendants 2-4 would execute relinquishment deeds in favour of the plaintiff and the defendant no.1. On 15.10.2007 the defendant...
Harjyot Kaur and ors Vs. Today Homes and Infrastructure Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment Pronounced on: April 02, 2013 R.A. No.321/2012 in CS(OS) No.2405/2009 HARJYOT KAUR & ORS Through ..... Plaintiffs Mr.Dhruv Mehta, Sr.Adv. with Ms.Amrita Sanghi, Mr.Akshay Sharma and Mr.Sameer Abhyankar, Advs. versus TODAY HOMES AND INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD ..... Defendant Through Mr.Vibhu Bakhru, Sr.Adv. with Ms.Pooja Saigal, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. By this order, I propose to decide the review application being R.A.No.321/2012 filed by the plaintiffs under Section 114 read with Order XLVII, Rule 1 and Section 151 CPC for review of the order dated 23 rd January, 2012 passed by this Court.2. The abovementioned suit has been filed by the plaintiffs under Order XXXVII CPC, inter-alia, praying for passing a money decree of an amount of `1,43,22,000/- along with interest. In the suit, the defendant filed the application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointmen...
NitIn Garg and Others Vs. M/S Designarch Infrastructure Pvt Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Pronounced on: April 02, 2013 + OMP No.50/2013 NITIN GARG AND OTHERS .....Petitioners Through: Ms. Sundeepta Kumar Pal, Adv. versus M/S DESIGNARCH INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD .....Respondent Through None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) challenging the order dated 2nd November, 2012 of sole Arbitrator Justice K.S. Gupta (Retd.), who disposed of an application under Section 16 of the Act filed by the petitioners upholding the jurisdiction of the Tribunal on the ground that the flat buyers agreement shall not come to an end and arbitration clause 42 will not be wiped out even after the execution of the sale deeds.2. Brief facts of the petition are that the respondent company developed a group housing complex known as Designarch Gardenia Homes Group Housing Complex,...
Ramzani Vs. Anjuman Wakil E Quam Punjabian
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA 67/2013 RAMZANI Through: ..... Appellant Mr Mohd. Azam Ansari, Adv. with appellant in person versus ANJUMAN WAKIL E QUAM PUNJABIAN ..... Respondent Through: Mr Anand Singh, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN ORDER % 02.04.2013 LPA 67/2013 & CM 1713/2013 (filing additional documents) 1. The respondent Society filed an application under Section 19 of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956 seeking permission to initiate eviction of the appellant from the premises comprising one room, common open courtyard and a lavatory on the first floor of the property bearing number 928, Mohalla Kishen Ganj, Teliwara, Delhi, which falls in a slum area. Notice of the aforesaid application was issued to the appellant and served upon him. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, notice was received by the son of the appellant. Since neither no one appeared nor any reply on behalf of the appellant was ...
- ‹ Prev
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- Next ›
- Last »