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.
S.D.Engineer and Contractor Vs. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2013
#13 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3337/2010 S.D.ENGINEER & CONTRACTOR ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Ajay Kumar Porwal, Advocate versus MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr. H.S. Dahiya, Advocate Date of Decision:5. h September, 2013 % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 with the following prayers:(i) Quash the letter No. EE/C/MTNL/AWARD/09-10/J.O. No. 05 and subsequent proceedings thereof as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the constitution of India and hence and void ab-initio; (ii) Direct the respondent to settle the account of the petitioner in accordance with law and in the light of the general terms & condition as enshrined in the original contract agreement signed between parties to the present litigation; (iii) 2. Issue such other/Further orders as are deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case a...
Munna Lal Saini (Deceased) Through Lr???s Vs. Sanjay Gulati
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h September, 2013 % + RFA 542/2007 MUNNA LAL SAINI (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Ram Kishan Saini, Adv. versus SANJAY GULATI ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J 1.The appeal impugns the judgment and decree dated 30 th July, 2007 of the Court of the Addl. District Judge, Delhi in Suit No.206/03/02 filed by the appellant/plaintiff for recovery of possession of shop No.9150 in Gali No.3, Multani Dhanda, Paharganj, New Delhi and in the Counter Claim filed by the respondent/defendant for recovery of Rs.4,76,000/- from the appellant/plaintiff, to the extent the same makes the decree for possession passed in favour appellant/plaintiff of paying the appellant/plaintiff a sum of conditional Rs.1,90,000/- to to the the respondent/defendant.2. Notice of the appeal was issued and on the application of the appellant/plaintiff for interim relief the operat...
Adarsh Kant Kapoor Vs. State Bank of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI #12. + CS (OS) No. 882 of 2012 ADARSH KANT KAPOOR ..... Plaintiff-in-person. versus STATE BANK OF INDIA & ANR. .... Defendants Through: Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, Advocate for Defendant No.1. Mr. Kapil Yadav and Mr. Rahul Khurana, Advocates for Defendant No.2. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR % ORDER 05 09.2013 IA Nos. 5255 of 2013 (under Order XII Rule 6 CPC) & 8847 of 2013 [under Order VII Rule 11(c)] 1. The background to this application is that the aforementioned suit has been filed by the Plaintiff Dr. Adarsh Kant Kapoor against State Bank of India, Vikas Puri Branch, New Delhi (Defendant No.1) and his mother Smt. Shakuntala Kapoor (Defendant No.2) seeking a recovery of Rs. 33,14,388 along with pendente lite and future interest at the maximum legally permissible rate or at the discretion of the Court. Initially filed as a summary suit, it was later converted into regular suit by an order dated 20th November 2012.2. The Plaintiffs father died in 1...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Liyakat and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2013
R~20D * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:5. h September, 2013 MAC.APP. 833/2005 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Khyati Sharma and Ms. Sonia Sharma, Advs. Versus LIYAKAT & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: NEMO. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the order dated 30.04.2005, whereby ld. Tribunal while granting the compensation amount has fastened the liability upon the appellant to pay the compensation.2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that on 10.11.2001, at about 2.00 am, respondent no. 2 was travelling in a truck bearing registration no. UP-12-7484 and was going to Faridabad from Gokalpuri, Delhi. When he reached at Gajrola Main Road, then another truck no. UP-12D-6518 driven by its driver at a very high speed rashly and negligently without caring for the traffic rules came from the back side and hit the truck. As a result of the force...
New India Assurance Co Ltd. Vs. Reena Devi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2013
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:5. h September, 2013 MAC.APP. 333/2010 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Kanwal Chaudhary and Mr. Shantanu Bhardwaj, Advs. versus REENA DEVI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Gaur, Adv. for R8. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Instant appeal has been preferred while challenging the impugned award dated 27.01.2010, whereby ld. Tribunal has fastened the liability on the appellant and respondent no. 8, i.e., Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.2. It is pertinent to mention here that respondent no. 8 has not challenged the said award.3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued the appeal mainly on the ground that in the accident in question a Maruti Car bearing Registration not DL-3CQ-3565 had hit the Truck-Trailer bearing Registration not HR-55-6995 and thereafter in repulsive action the said car came back and hit the Truck bearing Registration n...
S.P.Mediratta and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No. 2701/2013 5th September, 2013 % S.P.MEDIRATTA AND ORS. Through: ......Petitioner Ms. Anju Jain and Mr. Hitesh Sachar, Advocates. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: ...... Respondents Mr. Amrit Pal Singh, Adv. for R-1, 3,4 and 5. Mr. Gireesh Kumar and Mr. Ankur S.Kulkarni, Advs. for R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) CM No. 12407/2013 (delay in filing the counter-affidavit) For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and delay in filing the counter-affidavit is condoned. CM stands disposed of. WP(C) 2701/2013 1. By this writ petition, petitioners who are retired employees of the Central Silk Board-respondent no.2 pray that they should be granted benefits of Central Government Health Scheme (in short CGHS).2. Respondent nos. 1 and 2 have filed their counter-affidavits. As per these counter-affidavits, though the employer does not seem ...
Shri Ashok Kumar Vs. North Delhi Power Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No. 510/2012 5th September, 2013 % SHRI ASHOK KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Anuj Soni, Advocate. Versus NORTH DELHI POWER LTD. AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Vikram Nandrajog, Advocate with Mr. Sushil Jaswal, Advocate. Mr. Sumeet Pushkarna, Advocate for respondent No.2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Petitioner, by this writ petition, seeks direction for release of his terminal benefits which were payable on his retirement from the respondent No.1/ North Delhi Power Ltd.(now known as Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd.) on 31.10.2011. The only ground on which payment of terminal benefits was withheld was that a criminal case was pending against the petitioner under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the connected relevant provisions of Indian Penal Code, 1860.2. The issue in the present case as to entitlement of an employer to withhold the t...
Vivek Garg Vs. Y.C Kurele
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: Pronounced on: + 30.08.2013 05.09.2013 IA No. 8220/2013 in CS(OS) 933/2013 ..... Plaintiff VIVEK GARG Through versus Y.C KURELE Through Mr.H.C.Mittal, Mr.Kameshwar Mishra and Ms.Nikita Bhargava, Advs. ..... Defendant Mr.H.L.Tiku, Senior Advocate with Ms.Swati Gupta, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.IA No. 8220/2013 in CS(OS) 933/2013 1. This is an application filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC for interim injunction. The application came up for hearing along with the Suit on 17.5.2013 when this Court passed ex parte injunction order against the defendant restraining the defendant from alienating, encumbering or parting with possession of the suit property.2. It is the contention of the plaintiff in the accompanying plaint that the defendant is the owner and is in possession of Plot Nos.154/696 and 154/697, Village Pooth Khurd, Lal Dora, Delhi. The area of the above property is as un...
Shankar Kumar Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2013
$~ 9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1781/2013 Date of decision:5. h September, 2013 % SHANKAR KUMAR Through : ..... Petitioner Mr. Prakash Kumar Singh, Adv. versus THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through : Ms. Saahila Lamba, Adv. for Ms. Richa Kapoor, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO GITA MITTAL, J.(Oral) 1. The writ petitioner assails the order dated 8th April, 2013 whereby the Revisional Authority has rejected the revision petition dated 1st April, 2013 filed by the petitioner on the ground that the same was belated.2. It appears that the petitioner was subjected to disciplinary proceedings which culminated in a final order dated 30th November, 2005 passed by the office of the Commandant, Central Industrial Security Force (Home Ministry) finding the petitioner guilty of charges for which the inquiry was held. The Disciplinary Authority imposed the punishment of reduction of pay of the WP(C) No.1781/2013 p...
Dharampal Satyapal Limited Vs. Suneel Kumar Rajput and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-05-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) No. 381 of 2012 DHARAMPAL SATYAPAL LIMITED ..... Plaintiff Through: Ms. Vaishali Mittal with Ms. Nupur Kumar and Mr. Gurpreet Singh, Advocates. versus SUNEEL KUMAR RAJPUT & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Farukh Khan with Ms. Sheeba Khan, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER 05 09.2013 IA Nos. 2922 of 2012 (u/O XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 CPC) 1. The Plaintiff holds registration for the mark Rajnigandha, in Class 31 which relates to tobacco products. The Plaintiffs case is that the trademark Rajnigandha was adopted by the Plaintiffs predecessors in the year 1983 in respect of pan masala. The Plaintiff is registered as the subsequent proprietor of this mark since 25th February 2002. The Plaintiff claims that Rajnigandha, the Plaintiffs flagship brand, is the worlds largest selling premium flavoured pan masala and that the consumers around the world associate the mark Rajnigandha exclusively with the Plaintiff. The export sales of the Plai...
- ‹ Prev
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- Next ›
- Last »