Delhi Court January 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 32 of about 723 results (0.021 seconds)The New India Assurance Co Ltd. Vs. Ashok Kumar and ors
Court: Delhi
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:21. t January, 2014 MAC.APP. 1249/2012 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. Niraj Singh, Adv. Versus ASHOK KUMAR & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma, Adv. for R1 and R2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.(Oral) 1. Instant appeal has been preferred against the impugned award dated 25.09.2012, whereby ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation for an amount of Rs.29,28,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till deposit of the amount.2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued the instant appeal on two grounds, firstly, the claimants have failed to prove the salary of the deceased, despite, ld. Tribunal has wrongly assessed his salary as Rs.20,000/- per month.3. The second ground argued by counsel for the appellant is that the deceased was not in a permanent job, despite, 30% addition ...
Tag this Judgment!ilyasuddIn Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:21. t January, 2014 + CRL.A. 712/2011 ILYASUDDIN Through: ..... Appellant Ms. Anu Narula, Advocate versus STATE Through: ..... Respondent Ms. Richa Kapoor, APP % CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HONBLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. It is stated that human lust knows no bounds-if there is any truth in it, the present case is a glaring example of such lust. A tiny tot aged about 2-1/2 years has not only fallen a victim of the lust of the appellant but also lost his precious life resulting in conviction of the appellant u/s 377/302 IPC in Sessions Case No.134/2008 u/s 377/302 IPC, P.S. Kapashera and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of 10 years for offence punishable u/s 377 IPC and for imprisonment of life for offence punishable u/s 302 IPC and further directions not to release him before the expiry of 25 years. However, benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C was given to him.2. Succinctly s...
Tag this Judgment!Anita Sharma and ors Vs. Kulachi Hansraj Model School and ors
Court: Delhi
* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:21. 01.2014 + W.P.(C) 439/2014 ANITA SHARMA & ORS ..... PETITIONERS VERSUS KULACHI HANSRAJ MODEL SCHOOL & ORS ... RSPONDENTS ADVOCATES WHO APPEARED IN THIS CASE: For the Petitioners: Mr. Atul Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Alok Gupta and Ms. Purnima Maheshwari, Advocates for R-3 CORAM : HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J1 By this writ petition a direction in the nature of a mandamus has been sought by the petitioners so as to include the petitioners on the roll of permanent employees of respondent no.1 school. 1.1 A consequential prayer has been sought for reinstatement and continuity of service with full wages. 1.2 The petitioners aver that they are qualified teachers who have been working with respondent no.1 school for several years. It is claimed that the petitioners were engaged to teach students who belong to Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) of the Society under the EWS Scheme. 1.3 ...
Tag this Judgment!Ashwani Bahl and ors. Vs. Air India Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No.222/2012 21st January, 2014 % ASHWANI BAHL & ORS. Through: ......Appellants Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate. VERSUS AIR INDIA LTD. Through: ...... Respondent Mr. Mudit Sharma, Mr. Tanmaya Nirmal, Advocates CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) impugning the judgment of the court below dated 31.3.2012 by which the objections filed by the appellants herein under Sections 30 and 33 of the Act have been dismissed.2. The facts of the case are that the appellant No.1 was appointed as a trainee pilot with the respondent herein (claimant in the arbitration proceedings) on terms and conditions as mentioned in the letter dated 26.07.1989. The appellant No.1 also executed an indemnity bond dated 1.8.1989 to render 7 years of service with the respondent...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Jagdish Vs. Smt. Krishna Kumari
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.48/2012 21st January, 2014 % SHRI JAGDISH Through: ......Appellant Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Advocate. VERSUS SMT. KRISHNA KUMARI Through: ...... Respondent Mr. M.L. Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Anil Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This second appeal filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugns the judgment of the appellate Court dated 28.1.2012 by which the appellate Court set aside the judgment of the trial Court dated 18.2.2011 which had dismissed the suit of the respondentlandlord herein (plaintiff in the trial Court) filed for possession, recovery of arrears of rent and future damages.2. Appellate Court by the impugned judgment has held that the suit property is situated in the area to which no notification has been issued under sub-Section (2) of Section 1 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as...
Tag this Judgment!Kamal Sahdev Vs. M/S. Grid India Power Cables Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
$~F-2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: January 21, 2014 + CS(OS) 1858/2009 KAMAL SAHDEV Through: Mr.Atul Batra, Adv. ...Plaintiff Versus M/S. GRID INDIA POWER CABLES PVT. LTD. & ANR. Through: None. ...Defendants CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S. SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. Plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs.85,97,286/-. On 07.12.2009, the defendants entered appearance and sought time to file the written statement. Pursuant to the order dated 07.07.2010 neither the written statement was filed nor the defendants were represented in the Court. Thereafter, due to nonappearance of the defendants on various dates, the defendants were proceeded ex-parte by an order dated 07.07.2010.2. The plaintiff has led ex-parte evidence and has examined three witnesses. PW-1 Shri Kamal Sahdev has testified on the lines of the plaint. PW-1 has testified that he is the sole proprietor and is carrying on his business from 60 Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-II...
Tag this Judgment!Association of Qualified and Trained Technologists Through Its Preside ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
V.N. Gaur, Member (A): 1. This is a contempt petition filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 filed by the applicants in OA-4289/2010, stating that the contemnor/respondent in that OA has not complied with the order of this Tribunal dated 8.10.2012 in letter and spirit. 2. Learned counsel of the applicants submits that the contemnor/respondent violated the order of this Tribunal by not giving personal hearing to the applicant by himself and according to the information available to the applicants he was on leave on that day. The applicants met the officiating Director, AIIMS who directed them to meet the Chief Administrative Officer. The order dated 9.7.2013 also does not address all the issues that were raised by the applicants in OA-4289/2010. The respondents have thus violated the order of the Tribunal and, therefore, liable for committing contempt of the Tribunal under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 3. Learned counsel further alleges that the contemnor...
Tag this Judgment!North Delhi Power Ltd. Vs. Premlata
Court: Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi
S.C. Jain, Member: 1) The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the order dt. 22.05.2012 passed by District Forum (North) Tis Hazari, Delhi in Execution Case No. 108/09. 2) The brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that the respondent/complainant had filed the Consumer Complaint alleging deficiency of service on the part of the appellant. Electricity connection bearing K. No. 33105031646 was in the name of one M/s R.K. Enterprises. The respondent/complainant purchased the premises where this connection was installed sometime in 2007. On 28.03.2008 the above said connection was disconnected due to non-payment of outstanding dues but the respondent/complainant allegedly restored the electricity connection illegally and this fact came to the notice of the appellant when the officials of the appellant visited the premises of the respondent/complainant to ascertain meter reading and on many occasions the respondent/complainant deliberately did not ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Archana Wadhwa, J. 1. Without going into the detailed reasoning adopted by the adjudicating authority as also by Commissioner (Appeals) and the detailed arguments advanced by the learned advocate Ms Reena Khair, I find that the short dispute in the present appeal relates to removal of old and used capital goods from the appellants factory during the period April, 2001 to March, 2003. As per the Revenue, inasmuch as the said capital goods were cenvatable and as the appellants had taken the credit of duty paid on the same, they were required to pay the duty at the time of clearance of said machines. On the other hand, it is also the contention that the said machines were purchased by them prior to period 1994 and no Cenvat credit stand availed in respect of same. 2. It is seen that appellants have taken categorical stand and has placed on record the accounts maintained by them. They have also submitted that an identical dispute covering same period was the subject matter of earlier Show ...
Tag this Judgment!Subhash Chander Gupta, New Delhi Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, T ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Raj Vir Sharma, Judicial Member: 1. I have perused the records and heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. This R.A. has been filed by the applicant seeking review of the order dated 16.2.2009 passed by the Tribunal in T.A.No.29 of 2009. In paragraph 3 of the Review Application, the applicant has prayed for the following relief: 1. Direct the respondents to issue medical card to the applicant which he is entitled to after the retirement, and the same be directed to be issued on the basis of the applicants last drawn salary i.e. Rs.10,250/- and on the basis of already deposited charges for the making of the medical card at the rates so applicable at the time of retirement. It is further prayed that the medical card be directed to be made as per the entitlement of the applicant. Direct the respondent to reimburse an amount of Rs.62,102/- for the bills so raised (up to 07.04.2010) for the treatment of the applicants wife the details of which are as shown in table having be...
Tag this Judgment!