Delhi Court January 2014 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.
Hemant Kumar Swamy, Under Dy. Chief Material Manager, Delhi and Anothe ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2014
G. George Paracken, Member (J). 1. Both these Original Applications are identical and they are being heard and disposed of by this common order. 2. The Applicants are aggrieved by the impugned Office Order No.190 dated 10.09.2012 and Office Order No.184 dated 23.08.2012 respectively by which their pay has been refixed and ordered recovery of the excess amount paid to them. 3. Brief background of the case is that 50 colleagues of the Applicants had filed by OA No.1649/1997 - Mohinder Singh and Others before this Tribunal and it was allowed on 09.07.2003. By the said order this Tribunal granted seniority to the Applicants therein from the date of their ad hoc promotion as Clerks with consequential benefits. Thereafter, the Applicants and others filed OA No.1900/2007 - Hemant Kumar Swamy and Others and by order dated 12.12.2008, this Tribunal extended the aforesaid benefits to the Applicants therein also. Later on, the order passed by this Tribunal in OA No.1649/1997 (supra) was challenge...
Shobha Phadanvis Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2014
1. In pursuance of the order of transfer of original Writ Petition No.1277/2000 by Honble High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench this application is taken on file. The Applicant has filed this application to protect the forest cover of Maharashtra, particularly in the forest area of District Chandrapur and Gadchilori by way of prohibiting/preventing the illegal cutting and smuggling of seasonal wood. The Applicant was Member of State Legislative Assembly (M.L.A.) when the Application was filed and she tried to bring the issues raised in this Application on floor of the State Legislature through various legislatives methods. However, she could not get the required responses and hence filed this Application. The Applicant submits that in the month of November 1999 she received a complaint that there was illegal cutting of the forest involving teak and seasonal wood in Chimur-Wahangaon compartment No.57 of 536 Hectare. Upon verification, she found that this illegal activity was going on the s...
Cce, Jaipur Vs. M/S. Welcure Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Bhiwadi (R ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2014
Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, J. 1. Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals), revenue has filed the present appeal. I have heard Shri B.B. Sharma, learned AR appearing for the revenue, and Shri R. Krishnan appearing for the respondent. 2. As per facts on record the respondent M/s. Welcure Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of Pharmaceuticals formulations. Appellants factory as also sales offices cum godowns and residential premises of their director/authorized representative were put to search on 31.02.2000 and various incriminating document were recovered. The Revenue also obtained photocopy of the invoices supplied by an unknown informer. In all these invoices consignee was shown as the office of the manufacturing unit. The said photocopies of the invoices were having the same serial number of the regular/genuine invoices but the name of the consignee, description, quantity and the value of the goods shown in the photocopy of the invoices were...
Cce, Jaipu Vs. M/S. Aditya Industries, and Others
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-2014
Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J. 1. All the four appeals filed by the Revenue against the order in appeal passed by Commissioner (Appeals) are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order. 2. I have heard Shri B.B. Sharma, learned AR appearing for the revenue, and Shri Bipin Garg, learned advocate appearing for the respondent. 3. As per fact on record all the Respondents were procuring various raw material such as Palm Kernel Fatty Acid, Coconut Acid, Palm Acid oils etc. from registered dealer M/s. Harsh and Company. The said dealer was, in terms procuring the said raw material from M/s. Gaytri Traders. The said Gaytri Traders was a registered dealer with Department with effect from 07.02.2009. However, investigations made at the end of M/s Gaytri Traders revealed that they had vacated the said registered premises on 30.04.09. As such their registration was was revoked abinitio i.e. from the initial date 07.02.09, vide order-in-original dated 31.12.09. 4. ...
Forum for Promotion of Quality Education for All Vs. Lt. Governor of D ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
45 & 52 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 177/2014 ACTION COMMITTEE UNAIDED RECOGNIZED PRIVATE SCHOOLS ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Senior Advocate with Mr. P.D. Gupta, Mr. Kamal Gupta, Ms. Diya Kapur, Ms. Shyel Trehan, Mr. Nshant Gokhale and Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Advocates. versus HONBLE LT. GOVERNOR & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Raja Ram Sundaram, Senior Advocate with Mr. V.K. Tandon, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Himanshu Bajaj, Advocate for respondent No.3/UOI. Mr. Ashok Agarwal, Advocate with Mr. Khagesh B. Jha, Advocate for Social Jurist. And 52 + W.P.(C) 202/2014 FORUM FOR PROMOTION OF QUALITY EDUCATION FOR ALL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vedanata VArma and Mr. Vibhor Kush, Advocates. versus LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Raja Ram Sundaram, Senior Advocate with Ms. Zubeda Begum for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Himanshu Bajaj, Advocate for respondent No.3/UOI. Mr....
Lalit Madhan Vs. Pramod Kalra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:10. h January, 2014. % + RFA No.350/2013 LALIT MADHAN Through: .. Appellant Mr. Raman Kapur, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Aviral Tiwari, Adv. Versus PRAMOD KALRA .. Respondent Through: Ms. Purnima Maheshwari, Adv. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. The appeal impugns the judgment and decree (dated 6th April, 2013 of the Court of the Additional District Judge (ADJ) (Central-07), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Civil Suit No.116/2010 filed by the respondent/plaintiff/landlord against the appellant/defendant/tenant) (i) of ejectment of the appellant/defendant/tenant from Flat No.908, 9th Floor, Hemkunt Tower, Rajendra Place, New Delhi; (ii) for recovery from the appellant/defendant/tenant of interest @ 12% per annum on the rent of Rs.2,645/- per month from 8th July, 2007 to 26th June, 2010 calculated for the period from 24th May, 2010 to 27th July, 2011; and, (iii) for recovery from the appellant/defendant/tenan...
Satish Kumar Bhalla Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on:-03.01.2014. Judgment delivered on 10.01.2014. CRL.A. 99/2007 SATISH KUMAR BHALLA Through versus ..... Appellant Mr. Kuldeep Singh, Adv. STATE Through + ..... Respondent Mr. Navin Kumar Jha, APP CRL.A. 748/2011 KAILASH NATH & ANR Through ..... Appellants Mr. Hari Nand Vashishtha and Mohd. Faisal, Advs. versus STATE Through ..... Respondent Mr. Varun Goswami, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 There are three appellants before this Court. Appellant Satish Kumar Bhalla is aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 03.02.2007 and 05.02.2007 respectively wherein he had been convicted for charges under Sections 7 read with 13 (2) and 13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 3- years and to pay a fine of Rs. 15,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 6 ...
institute for Inner Studies and ors. Vs. Charlotte Anderson and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
..* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Pronounced on: January 10, 2014 CS(OS) 2252/2011 & I.A. No.14617/2011, I.A. No.18553/2011, I.A. No.20143/2011, I.A. No.20144/2011, I.A. No.20167/2011, I.A. No.20762/2011, I.A. No.448/2012 and I.A. No.15808/2012 INSTITUTE FOR INNER STUDIES & ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr. Amit Chadha, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Karan Mehra, Mr. Lalit Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Bahaar Dhawan & Ms. Chandni Goel, Advs. versus CHARLOTTE ANDERSON & ORS ..... Defendants Through Mr. B.B. Sawhney, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Dipak Kumar Jena, Adv. & Ms. Minakshi Jena Ghosh, Adv. for D-1. Mr. Viplav Sharma, Adv. for D-2. Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mayank Kshirsagar, Adv. for D-3. Mr. Ajit Pudussery, Adv. with Mr. Dinesh Khurana, Adv. for D-11. Mr. Raghav Awasthi, Adv. for D-14. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiffs, (ten in numbers) have filed the present suit seeking declaration, permanent injunction and mandatory injunction alongwith...
Sunil Sikri Vs. the Management Committee of Guru Harkrishan Public
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:10. 01.2014 + W.P.(C) 191/2014 SUNIL SIKRI ..... Petitioner versus THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF GURU HARKRISHAN PUBLIC SCHOOL AND ANR ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the petitioner: Mr Sanjeev Ralli & Mr M. Parashar, Advocates For the respondents: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J CM No.340/2014 (Exemption) 1. Allowed subject to just exceptions. WP(C) No.191/2014 & CM No.339/2014 (Stay) 2. This writ petition is directed against a resolution dated 21.11.2013 passed by respondent no.1 as also the memorandum and article of charges dated 17.12.2013 issued by respondent no.2.3. A perusal of the petition would show that the petitioner appears to have tendered his resignation on 22.01.1994. The said resignation letter was, apparently, withdrawn by the petitioner on 23.01.1994. The issue as to whether the resignation was validly withdrawn was agitated before the concerned ...
JauddIn @ Pappu Vs. the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :10. h January, 2014 + CRL.A. 260/2003 JAUDDIN @ PAPPU Through : ..... Appellant Mr.J.P.Singh, Advocate with Mr.Rahul Kr.Singh, Advocate. VERSUS THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through : Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. SI Laxmi Narain, PS Rohini. CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. The appeal is listed today for directions and with the consent of the parties, is disposed of today.2. Jauddin @ Pappu (the appellant) is aggrieved by a judgment dated 12.09.2001 in Sessions Case No.169/2001 arising out of FIR No.389/98 registered at Police Station Rohini by which he and his associate Kali Charan were convicted for committing offences punishable under Section 458/392 read with Section 397 IPC and 27 Arms Act.3. Allegations against the appellant were that on 12.06.1998 at about 09.30 P.M. at house No.F-17/162 Sector-8, Rohini, he and his associates Kali Charan and Israj committed robbery using deadly weapons. Complainant- Hari O...
- ‹ Prev
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- Next ›
- Last »