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
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Shri Umesh Kumar Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on July 08 , 2013 Judgment Delivered on July 18, 2013 + W.P.(C) 4335/2011 SHRI UMESH KUMAR Represented by: ......Petitioner Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Manjeet Singh Reen and Ms. Saahila Lamba versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr. Rohit Dutta and Mr. Joydeep Mazumdar, Advocates for R-1 and R-2 Mr. A.K. Trivedi, Adv. for R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order and judgment dated June 3, 2011 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench (the Tribunal) in Original Application being No. 2160 of 2008 whereby the learned Tribunal had allowed the said Original Application filed by respondent No.3 herein resulting in petitioners empanelment being set aside.2. The cause of the dispute at hand emerged when respondent No. 2 vide its ord...
Shri P. P. Vaidya and ors. Vs. Ifci Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1319/2011 18th July, 2013 % SHRI P. P. VAIDYA & ORS. Through ..... Petitioners Mr. Vishnu Mehra, Advocate. versus IFCI LTD. & ORS. Through ..... Respondents Mr. Dinkar Singh, Adv. for IFCI Ltd. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) W.P.(C) 1319/2011, CM No. 2803/2011 (for directions) and CM No. 17164/2012 (under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC) 1. This writ petition is filed by 16 petitioners. All the 16 petitioners took voluntary retirement under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) issued by the respondent no. 1 employer/IFCI on 1 st February, 2008. The petitioners claim that petitioners had qualified the necessary requirements of the Scheme of Performance Linked Incentive (SPLI) dated 9 th August, 2007 and since this amount was not paid to the petitioners at the time of accepting VRS in spite of the petitioners having satisfied the requirements of the Scheme, the petitioners...
Prof. Marmar Mukhopadhyay Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No. 2566/2007 18th July, 2013 PROF. MARMAR MUKHOPADHYAY ......Petitioner Through: Mr. K.K.Rai, Sr. Adv. with Mr. S.K.Pandey, Advocate. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate for R-2 and 3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner-Prof. Marmar Mukhopadhyay has filed this writ petition seeking two reliefs. The first relief claimed is for quashing of the memorandum/chargesheet dated 28.11.2006. The second relief which is claimed is for quashing of the letter dated 30.11.2006 whereby the respondent no.2/employer has withheld the gratuity amount of the petitioner. I note that in the writ petition the basic challenge is to the memorandum/showcause notice dated 28.11.2006, and for which purpose, the factual and legal cause of action is laid out. The second prayer of the petitioner for release of gratuity is...
Sh. Harminder Khullar Vs. Mrs. Swaran Kanta Juneja and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:18. h July, 2013 % + RFA No.42/2008 SH. HARMINDER KHULLAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Adv. Versus MRS. SWARAN KANTA JUNEJA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Jaykant Prasad, Adv. for R-1to4. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. This first appeal under Section 96 of the CPC impugns the judgment and decree dated 14th December, 2007 of the Court of Addl. District Judge, Delhi dismissing Suit No.119/2006 filed by the appellant/plaintiff. Notice of the appeal was issued and vide ex parte order dated 5th February, 2008 status quo was directed to be maintained. Vide subsequent order dated 7 th May, 2008 the appeal was admitted and Trial Court record requisitioned and the interim order made absolute during the pendency of the appeal. On application of the respondents that they are senior citizens, hearing was expedited. The counsels have been heard.2. The suit from which this appeal a...
S and G Company and ors. Vs. Indica Trades Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:18. h July, 2013 % + RFA No.61/2012 S & G COMPANY & ORS. Through: ..... Appellants Ms. Nandni Sahni, Adv. Versus INDICA TRADES PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mrs. Rashmi Chopta & Kumardeb Sengupta, Advs. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J CMs No.16591/2012 & 16593/2012 (both of the respondent for recall of order dated 09.04.2012 and for stay thereof) & CM No.18765/2012 (of the appellant for release of amount deposited) 1. This appeal was preferred against the ex parte judgment and decree, dated 10.01.2012 of the Additional District Judge03, South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi in Suit No.277 of 2011 filed by the appellants / plaintiffs for ejectment of the respondent / defendant (after determination of tenancy) from portion of property ad-measuring 1200 sq. yds. in Khasra No.365 of Village Sultan Pur, Delhi, to the extent the same refused mesne profits / damages for use and occupation to t...
Rayons-enlighting Humanity Through Its Secretary and Others Vs. Minist ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
Swatanter Kumar, (Chairperson): 1. The State level Environmental Impact Assessment Authority, (for short SEIAA), in its meeting dated 19th December, 2012 agreed with the recommendations of the State Environmental Appraisal Committee, (for short SEAC) and declared that the Nagar Nigam (Municipal Corporation), Bareilly, Respondent No.4, was not required to take Environmental Clearance (for short EC) for Municipal Solid Waste Management (for short MSWM) Project, Bareilly, under the EIA Notification of 2006 (for short the Notification). Vide its letter of the same date, it so informed the Nagar Nigam, Bareilly. Inter alia, the legality, correctness and validity of this letter dated 19th December, 2012 have been challenged in the following applications: (i) In Application No.86 of 2013, the petition filed by Rayons-Enlighting Humanity, a Society registered under the Society Registration Act, 1860, it has prayed that the above letter dated 19th December, 2012 be quashed, and that the Ministr...
Shyam Sunder S/O Hori Lal Vs. Union of India Through Secretary Ministr ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
1. This is an application filed under Section 14 and 18 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. The Applicant - Shyam Sunder, claims to be aggrieved person on account of alleged violation of provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and particularly with the issuance of No Objection Certificate (NOC) dated 21.12.2012, by District Magistrate, Mainpuri (UP).The applicant seeks compliance to the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, by the concerned Authority prior to such grant of NOC before establishment of Petrol Pump outlet alongside National Highway No. 91 (NH-91) which may require the use of forest land for non-forestry purpose. The applicant further seeks directions to Divisional Forest Officer, Mainpuri to register First Information Report (FIR) under the provisions of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for offenses punishable under the Forest (Conservation) Act against District Magistrate Mainpuri, Hindustan Petroleum Ltd and Arpan Kumar s/o Mr. Jaiveer Sing...
Goa Foundation Through Dinesh George Dias and Another Vs. Union of Ind ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
Swatanter Kumar, (Chairperson) 1. Applicant No.1 is a registered society and claims to be at the forefront in environment campaigns in Goa working not just towards conserving and protecting the ecology of Western Ghats but also towards demanding additional protection, including declaration of wild life sanctuary as a tiger reserve. The said applicant claims to be a member of MoEF National Committee on Identifying Parameters for Designating Ecologically Sensitive Areas in India. Applicant No.2 also claims to be the principal convener of the Save the Western Ghats March, which was a landmark event in environmental activism in India. Both these applicants have approached the Tribunal for interim relief for directing the respondents not to issue any consent/environmental clearance or NOC or permission under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, the Forest Conservation Act, 19...
State of Nct of Delhi Vs. Taj Mohd. @ Taju and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2013
$~4 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.L.P. 8/2012 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sunil Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State versus TAJ MOHD. @ TAJU & ANR. Through: % ..... Respondent Mr. G.S. Sharma, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR ORDER1807.2013 CRL.L.P. 8/2012 1. This criminal leave to appeal has been preferred by the State under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to challenge the judgment dated 7th August 2010 passed by the learned Additional & Sessions Judge VI, Rohini Courts, Delhi, thereby acquitting the accused person of the charge under Section 302/34 of IPC.2. In brief, the case of the prosecution as culled out from the charge sheet is that on 28th December 2002 on receipt of DD No.19B, ASI Azad Mohd. alongwith constable Tej Singh reached the spot situated at 100 ft wide road at Sector 21-22, Rohini, Delhi, where he found a dead body of a male aged about 45 yea...
Govt. of Nct of Delhi and anr. Vs. Rajinder Prasad Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-17-2013
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: July 02, 2013 Judgment Pronounced on: July 17, 2013 + W.P.(C) 3822/2013 GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Petitioners Represented by: Ms.Zubeda Begum, Advocate versus RAJINDER PRASAD SINGH & ORS. .....Respondents Represented by: Mr.M.C.Dhingra, Advocate for R-1. Ms.Mamta Tiwari, Advocate for Mr.Amitesh Kumar, Advocate for R-2. None for respondents No.3 & 4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Regretfully, half facts, and these two incorrectly stated have been disclosed in the pleadings. Half facts which were most relevant and crucial have not been disclosed by either party in their pleadings. Fortunately for us, said half facts are recorded in a decision pronounced by a Single Bench of Patna High Court reported as 2001 (2) PLJR 53 National Teacher Training College, Arer & Ors. v The State of Bihar & Ors. which has been upheld by a Division Bench.2. In the...
- ‹ Prev
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- Next ›
- Last »