Delhi Court July 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

Try free for 7 days Semantic AI Search

Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.

Jul 26 2013

M/S. M.R. Shah Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and ...

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jul-26-2013

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:02. 07.2013 Pronounced on:26. 07.2013 + W.P.(C) 7957/2012, C.M. APPL. 1056/2013 M/S. M.R. SHAH LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner Versus INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR ........Respondents + W.P.(C) 7982/2012, C.M. APPL. 1057/2013 M/S. AGRAWAL ROADLINES (P) LTD. .....Petitioner Versus INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR. .......Respondents Through: Sh. Yakesh Anand with Sh. Murari Kumar and Ms. Sonam Anand, Advocates, for petitioners. Sh. M.M. Kalra, Advocate, for IOC. Sh. Anuj Aggarwal and Sh. Gaurav Khanna, Advocates, for UOI in both the cases. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. In these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, the W.P.(C) 7957/2012 & 7982/2012 Page 1 writ petitioners claim directions to set aside letter of the two respondents (hereafter collectively referred to as IOC) in respect of an award of tender for transportation of b...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 26 2013

Shiv Kumar Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jul-26-2013

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:26. h July, 2013 % + RFA No.114/2002 SHIV KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: None. Versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, Adv. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.None has appeared for the appellant inspite of matter having remained on board for a considerable time.2. The appeal is of the year 2002 and the counsel for the respondent MCD points out, has on two earlier occasions been dismissed in default of appearance of the appellant, though was restored.3. A perusal of the order sheet shows that notice of the appeal was issued on 05.03.2002 and the appeal was admitted on 18.08.2003; thereafter the same was dismissed in default of appearance of the appellant on 21.07.2011 and upon the appellant applying for restoration, restored vide order dated 08.02.2013; the appellant however again failed to appear on 25.02.2013 when again the appeal was dismissed in de...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 26 2013

National Insurance Co Ltd. Vs. Hari Om Mittal and ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jul-26-2013

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAC.A. 965/2011 % Judgment reserved on:23. d May, 2013 Judgment delivered on:26. h July, 2013 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Adv. versus HARI OM MITTAL & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. D.K. Ahuja, Adv. for R1. Mr. H.S. Bhullar, Adv. for R3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 26.08.2011 whereby, Ld. Tribunal has granted compensation for a sum of Rs.21,28,413/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till its realization.2. Counsel for the appellant has argued that respondent no. 1 / claimant was not in any employment as a driver, however, the Ld. Tribunal has considered his income at Rs.3,590/- as per minimum wages for a skilled person.3. Ld. Counsel submitted that PW7, brother of the respondent no. 1, has stated before the Ld. Trial Court that he used to engage respondent no. 1 as ...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 26 2013

Hardeep Gill Vs. PumpkIn Studio Pvt Ltd And anr.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jul-26-2013

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:24th July, 2013 Date of Decision:26. h July, 2013 % + CO.PET. 379/2012 & C.A. No.1501/2012 HARDEEP GILL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Sujeet Kumar Mishra, Adv. versus PUMPKIN STUDIO PVT LTD & Anr. .Respondent Through: Mr.Ajit Singh. Adv. for R-1. Ms.Gurpreet Gill, R-2 in person. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR JUDGMENT R.V. EASWAR, J.: This is a petition filed by Mr. Hardeep Gill, one of the directors of Pumpkin Studio Private Limited (Company), the first respondent herein, for the winding up of the Company under sections 433(c), (f) and (g) of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act). One of the other directors, Mrs. Gurpreet Gill, has been impleaded as the second respondent. She has filed the reply to the petition on behalf of the Company.2. The Company was incorporated in 2002 to carry on the multimedia centre where training was to be imparted to students and to carry on the software development. A franchise agreement was entered into by the ...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 26 2013

Union of India and ors. Vs. Mahendra Pal Singh and anr.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jul-26-2013

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: July 26, 2013 + W.P.(C) 2445/2012 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.R.V.Sinha, Advocate with Mr.R.N.Singh, Advocate versus MAHENDRA PAL SINGH AND ANR. Represented by: ..... Respondents None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.(Oral) 1. The question which arises for our consideration in this writ petition is whether the respondent No.1 is entitled to step up of pay at par with his junior Mr.Subhash Chand with effect from January 01, 2006.2. The petitioners herein are Union of India and its functionaries who have challenged the order dated January 09, 2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No.4203/2010 whereby the Tribunal has directed the petitioners to step up the pay of the respondent No.1 at par with his junior Mr.Subhash Chand with effect from January 01, 2006 and fix his pay accordingly.3. Notice was...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 26 2013

Living Media India Ltd. and anr. Vs. M. HussaIn and ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jul-26-2013

* 9 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) No. 488 of 2010 & IA No. 3448 of 2010 (u/O XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC) LIVING MEDIA INDIA LTD & ANR ..... Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Shilpa Singh, Advocate. versus M. HUSSAIN & ORS ..... Defendants Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR % ORDER 26 07.2013 1. The Plaintiff No.1, Living Media India Limited, and Plaintiff No. 2, T.V. Today Network Limited, have filed the present suit against Mr. M. Hussain, Defendant No. 1, M/s. Aman Graphics Printers, Defendant No. 2 and Mr. Uday Kapoor, Defendant No. 3 seeking permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from infringing the trade mark/service mark using the word SPEED AAJTAK as well as for restraining the Defendants from infringing the copyright of the Plaintiff in the artistic representation of the words AAJ TAK, directing transfer of the domain name/website located at the URL www.speedaajtak.com in favour of the Plaintiff. The further reliefs sought are for a decree for delivery up...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 26 2013

Chattar Sigh Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jul-26-2013

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: July 24, 2013 Judgment Pronounced on: July 26, 2013 + W.P.(C) 2512/2012 UTTAM SINGH AND ORS Represented by: ..... Petitioners Mr.C.Harishankar, Advocate with Mr.S.Sunil and Mr.N.Jagdish, Advocates versus MCD AND ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Mukesh Sharma, proxy counsel for Ms.Shobha Gupta, Advocate for MCD Ms.Zubeda Begum, Advocate with Ms.Sana Ansari, Advocate for GNCTD Ms.Jyoti Singh, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Saahila Lamba, Ms.Tinu Bajwa and Mr.Amandeep Joshi, Advocates for R-3 to R-7 W.P.(C) 2513/2012 HARISH CHANDRA AND ORS ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.C.Harishankar, Advocate with Mr.S.Sunil and Mr.N.Jagdish, Advocates versus MCD AND ORS Represented by: W.P.(C) No.2512/2012 & conn.matters ..... Respondents Ms.Zubeda Begum, Advocate with Ms.Sana Ansari, Advocate for GNCTD Mr.Alpha Phiris Dayal and Mr.Jindal, proxy counsels for Page 1 of 13 Mr.Sanjeev, Advocate for DPCC Ms.Jyoti Singh, Sr.Advocate with Ms...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 26 2013

M/S. Agrawal Roadlines (P) Ltd. Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and an ...

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jul-26-2013

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:02. 07.2013 Pronounced on:26. 07.2013 + W.P.(C) 7982/2012, C.M. APPL. 1057/2013 M/S. AGRAWAL ROADLINES (P) LTD. .....Petitioner Versus INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR. .......Respondents Through: Sh. Yakesh Anand with Sh. Murari Kumar and Ms. Sonam Anand, Advocates, for petitioners. Sh. M.M. Kalra, Advocate, for IOC. Sh. Anuj Aggarwal and Sh. Gaurav Khanna, Advocates, for UOI in both the cases. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT % For detailed judgment, the decision dated 26.07.2013 in W.P.(C) 7957/2012 may be referred to. S. RAVINDRA BHAT (JUDGE) NAJMI WAZIRI (JUDGE) JULY 26 2013 W.P.(C) 7982/2012 Page 1 W.P.(C) 7982/2012 Page 2...

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 26 2013