Delhi Court September 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.
New India Assurance Co Ltd. Vs. Basanti Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2013
$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:19th September, 2013 % + MAC.APP. 1150/2011 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. Through: ..... Appellants Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary, Advocate. Versus BASANTI DEVI & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Ajay Kumar, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Mr.Manish Shrivastava, Advocate for Respondent No.7. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 21.09.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted a total compensation of Rs.12,61,108/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company has argued that at the time of the accident, the deceased was 26 years of age, however, the learned Tribunal has wrongly applied the multiplier of 18 contrary to the dictum of Sarla Verma Vs. DTC and Ors. 2009 (6) SCC 121.3. Learned ...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Durgesh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2013
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:19th September, 2013 + MAC.APP. 289/2011 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Neerja Sachdeva, Advocate. Versus DURGESH AND ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr.Sanjeev Srivastava, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Mr. Mohit Gupta, Advocate for Respondent No.6. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. The present appeal is preferred against the impugned award dated 06.01.2011, whereby the learned Tribunal has granted a total compensation of Rs.24,63,600/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization of the amount.2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/Insurance Company has argued that the appellant/Insurance Company has examined its Senior Assistant as R2W1; and proved the DL verification report in respect of the driving licence of respondent No.6 as Ex.R2W1/2, notice under Order XII Rule 8 CPC as ...
Daya Nand Adarsh Vidyalaya Vs. Deepa Chibber and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.1009/2012 19th September, 2013 % DAYA NAND ADARSH VIDYALAYA ......Petitioner Through: Mr. S.K.Taneja, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv. VERSUS DEEPA CHIBBER & ANR. Through: ...... Respondents Mr. Anil Sehgal, Adv. for R-1. Ms. Sangeeta Sondhi and Mr. Rohit Nagpal, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition, petitioner-school impugns the judgment of the Delhi School Tribunal (DST) dated 21.12.2011. By the impugned judgment DST accepted the appeal which was filed by the respondent no.1 herein, and which appeal questioned the action of the petitioner-school in illegally terminating the services of the respondent no.1. Whereas the case of the respondent no.1 was that she was wrongly prevented from performing her duties and was removed from the school without following the procedure prescribed under the Delhi School Education Act...
M/S Rr Financial Consultants Ltd Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:19. h September, 2013 + Writ Peittion (C) No.990/2013 M/S RR FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS LTD ..... Petitioner Through Mr. J.K. Mittal, Mr. Varun Prabhakar and Mr. Varun Gaba, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondent Through Mr. Rahul Kaushik, Advocate for R-2 and 4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL) R.R. Financial Consultants Ltd. have filed the present writ petition with various prayers but the primary prayer is that the services being rendered by them do not fall in the category of business auxiliary service and business support service as defined and covered under the various provisions of Section 65 of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994. Another prayer made is that Rs.2,64,98,557/- paid by the petitioner, which is claimed to be illegally collected, should be refunded.2. Interestingly, during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the pet...
Continental Construction Ltd. Vs. National thermal Power Corporation L ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2013
$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 133/2012 CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Pawan Upadhyay & Ms Anisha Upadhyay, Advs. versus % NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr S.K. Taneja, Sr. Adv. with Mr Puneet Taneja & Ms Shweta, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER ORDER 19.09.2013 1. This is a petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the Act) with a prayer for appointment of an independent arbitrator to adjudicate upon disputes, which the petitioner claims have arisen between the parties herein. The petition is resisted by the respondent on several grounds. The principal ground being: that there is accord and satisfaction; pursuant to a Conciliation Agreement dated 27.11.2007 (in short the Conciliation Agreement) executed between the parties which, apparently covers the subject disputes raised herein. The petitioner, quite obviously, avers to the contrary.2. In...
Bhagwan Chand Saxena Vs. Export Inspection Council of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.11353/2005 &CM833205 (stay) % 19th September, 2013 BHAGWAN CHAND SAXENA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. G.D. Bhandari, Advocate. Versus EXPORT INSPECTION COUNCIL OF INDIA AND ORS...... Respondents Through: Mr. L.R. Khatana, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. The challenge by means of this writ petition is to the orders passed by the departmental authorities; disciplinary authority and the appellate authority; whereby petitioner has been visited with the penalty of removal from service. Penalty has been imposed inasmuch as petitioner was found guilty of harassing, threatening and causing sexual harassment of a lady employee Smt. Bimla Sharma.2. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner at length on innumerable number of points which have been argued before me. The different heads of arguments pertain to non-supply of documents during the enquiry pr...
F.Shaheryar and anr. Vs. Ministry of Information and Broadcasting Thr. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:19. 9.2013 + WP(C) No.6598/2011 CM NO.6841/2013 (for modification /stay) F.SHAHERYAR & ANR. Through: ..... Appellants Mr. Apurb Lal, Advocate versus MINISTRY OF INFORMATION & BROADCASTING THR. SECRETARY & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Rajeeve Mehra, ASG with Mr. R.Mishra, Advocate AND WP(C) No.5388/2012 DIRECTOR GENERAL, AIR & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. S.M.Arif, Advocate versus VINAY KUMAR JAIN AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. A.K.I. Behera, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI % MR. JUSTICE S.RAVINDRA BHAT(Open Court) 1. The present petitions are directed against an order of the CAT dated 6th May, 2011 in O.A. No.136 of 2012, the effect of which was to direct extension of regular benefits to the respondents/applicants.2. The Central Government has preferred a writ petition bearing WP No.5388/2012 against the impugned orders whereas the private respondents in the...
Mr. Ajay Batra Vs. Mr. Y.P. Batra and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of decision:18. h September, 2013 CS(OS) 2154/2007 MR. AJAY BATRA Through: + ..... Plaintiff Mr. Abhinav Vashisht, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sacchin Puri, Ms. Kaadambari, Ms. Namitha Mathews, Mr. Anuj Malhotra and Ms. Monica Chugh, Advs. Versus MR. Y.P. BATRA & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Arvind Nayar, Mr. Vikas Kumar & Mr. Zarkab Anwar, Advs. for D-2. Mr. Gaurav Mitra, Mr. Rishabh Maheshwari & Ms. Samreen, Advs. for D-3 & 4. AND CS(OS) 571/2008 MS. AMBALIKA BATRA & ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Anil Sapra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Saket Sikri, Advocate. Versus SH. AJAY BATRA & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Abhinav Vashisht, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sacchin Puri, Ms. Kaadambari, Ms. Namitha Mathews, Mr. Anuj Malhotra & Ms. Monica Chugh, Advs. for D-1. Mr. Arvind Nayar, Mr. Vikas Kumar & Mr. Zarkab Anwar, Advs. for D-3. Mr. Gaurav Mitra, Mr. Rishabh Maheshwari & Ms. Samreen, Advs. for D-4 & 5. AND + TEST.CAS. 9/2009 GEETA BATRA Through: ..... Pe...
Chanan Kaur and ors Vs. Ajit Singh (Deceased) Through Lr???s
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:18. h September, 2013 + RFA 329/1997 CHANAN KAUR & ORS Through: ..... Appellants Mr. Sanjeev Sindhwani, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sanjay Dua, Advocate. Versus AJIT SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS ..... Respondent Through: Mr. S.K. Kalia and Mr. K.K. Bhalla, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. The appeal impugns the judgment and decree dated 30 th September, 1997 [of the Court of Additional District Judge (ADJ), Delhi in RCS No.63/1992 (Old No.69/1984)] in favour of respondent/plaintiff and against the appellants/defendants for recovery of possession of a portion of the ground floor of house not L-59, Kalkaji, New Delhi.2. The appeal was admitted for hearing and the counsel for the respondent/plaintiff made a statement that the respondent/plaintiff will not execute the decree. Vide further interim order dated 13th July, 2006, the appellants/defendants were restrained from carrying out any const...
Seasky Exports Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on :13. 09.2013 Judgment pronounced on :18. 09.2013 W.P.(C) 1407/2011 SEASKY EXPORTS PVT.LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashok Mathur, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Sweety Manchanda, CGSC for R-1/UOI Mr. Savinder Singh and Mr Vishal, Adv. for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN V.K. JAIN, J.The Government of India, with a view to encourage exports firms, started a scheme termed as External Market Assistance and Internal Market Assistance Scheme which stipulated grant of subsidy to the exporters of specified products including diversified jute products. Vide communication dated 1.4.1991, the Government of India amended the definition of diversified jute products for the purpose of extending benefits under such schemes to mean products containing two or more fibers in which jute remain the dominant fiber, provided that the percentage of jute contents in products containing jute and s...
- ‹ Prev
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- Next ›
- Last »