Delhi Court October 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 22 of about 220 results (0.024 seconds)intellectual Property Attorneys Association Vs. Union of India and anr
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:9. h October, 2014. + W.P.(C) No.3679/2014 & CM No.7455/2014 (for stay) INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. C.M. Lall, Adv., Ms. Prathiba M. Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mohan Vidhani, Mr. Ajay Sahni, Mr. Subhash Bhutoria, Mr. Rahul Vidhani, Mr. Anuj Nair, Mr. Ujjwala Jeremiah and Ms. Suhasini Raina, Advs. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. The petition impugns Clause No.3 of the Office Order No.16 of 2012- 2013 dated 8th June, 2012 issued by the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Controller General), Government of India and which Clause No.3 is as under:3. No request for amendment shall be allowed which seeks substantial alteration in the application for registration of trademark. The substantial amendment in the trademark, proprieto...
Tag this Judgment!Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors Vs. Rajinder Singh
Court: Delhi
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:09. 10.2014 + W.P. (C) 5730/2012 C.M. Nos.11729/2012 & 8276/2014 GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, proxy for Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Advocate. versus RAJINDER SINGH ..... Respondent Through: Dr. M.P. Raju with Ms. Thressiamma K.P., Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The Government of NCT of Delhi (hereafter referred to as GNCTD) is aggrieved by an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereafter referred to as CAT) dated 1.6.2012, whereby it allowed OA No.159/2010. That application had been disposed of by an earlier order but was subject matter of W.P.(C)5502/2010, which was disposed of on 18.8.2010. The Division Bench had then required the CAT to look into the certain specific aspects and render findings. The applicant/respondent in the present case had challenged the refusal by the GNCTD th...
Tag this Judgment!Manoj Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: September 11, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: October 01, 2014 + CRL.A. 217/1998 MANOJ KUMAR Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Vikrant Sarin, Advocate versus STATE Represented by: ..... Respondent Ms.Aashaa Tiwari APP Insp.Nand Kishor, PS Civil Lines CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The police swung into action on March 27, 1993 at about 10.15 A.M. when one Bhupinder Singh PW-21, came to PS Civil Lines and informed Insp.B.S.Dahiya PW-50, that appellant Manoj is firing shots at his (Bhupinders) father near Quarter No.F-1, Police Colony, Civil Lines, Delhi.2. Accompanied by SI Prakash Chand PW-24, SI D.D.Sharma PW-30, SI Dharambir Singh PW-33, SI G.D.Pathak PW-23, Ct.Babu Lal PW-31, Ct.Pradeep Kumar PW-40, Ct.Hari Sikander Singh PW-39 and HC Om Prakash PW-12 and Insp.B.S.Dahiya reached the spot. What happened thereafter is recorded in the endorsement (rukka) ...
Tag this Judgment!Satpal Rana and ors Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:01. 10.2014 W.P.(C) 3535/2014 & CM No.7223/2014 SATPAL RANA & ORS ..... Petitioners versus STATE AND ANR ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioners : Ms R.S. Bokde, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr Hasmat Nabi, Advocate for UOI Mr Yeeshu Jain, Advocate with Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for LAC Mr Arjun Pant, Advocate for DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioners claim that the subject acquisition has lapsed because of the deeming provisions of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act).2. The learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the following Supreme Court decisions: (1) Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors: (2014) 3 S...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Tarsem Kumar Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: October 01, 2014 + W.P. (C) No.5649/2013 SHRI TARSEM KUMAR Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. S.N. Kaul, Advocate Versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar and Mr. T.P. Singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI JUDGMENT KAILASH GAMBHIR, J1 The petitioner, a regular Commandant in CISF, who was decorated with the President Police Medal for his meritorious service in the year 2007 has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the order dated 17th February 2011 passed by Respondent No.2 whereby his representation dated 2nd August 2010 seeking expunction of his Average grading and upgradation of the same to Very Good in the ACR/APAR of the year 2008-2009, was rejected. The petitioner also seeks directions to the respondents to hold a Review DPC for his promotion from the post of C...
Tag this Judgment!Manav Dharma Trust Vs. Government of Nct of Delhi and anr
Court: Delhi
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:01. 10.2014 W.P.(C) 3411/2014 ... Petitioner MANAV DHARMA TRUST versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner For the Respondent No.1 For the Respondent No.2 : Mr Sameer Jain with Mr Sandeep Bajaj, Mr Siddharth Jain and Mr Ekank Mehra : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi : Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner seeks the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014.2. The petitioners case is that the possession of the subject land is with the petitioner and the respondents have not taken possession of the same. He also submits that the Award wa...
Tag this Judgment!Anand Prakash Vs. State and anr
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:01. 10.2014 W.P.(C) 3536/2014 & CM Nos.7225/2014, 15222/2014, 15223/2014 ANAND PRAKASH ..... Petitioner versus STATE AND ANR ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Ms Rahul Gupta and Mr Shekhar Gupta, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain, Advocate with Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner claims that the subject acquisition has lapsed because of the deeming provisions of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act).2. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the following Supreme Court decisions: (1) Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors: (2014) 3 SCC183 (2) Union of India and Ors...
Tag this Judgment!Mahender Singh and ors Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:01. 10.2014 W.P.(C) 3740/2014 MAHENDER SINGH AND ORS ..... Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Anuroop, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain, Advocate with Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate Mr Zamir Ahmad, Advocate for DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioners claim that the subject acquisition has lapsed because of the deeming provisions of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act).2. The learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the following Supreme Court decisions: (1) Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors: (2014) 3 SCC183 (2) Union of India and Ors v. Shiv Raj and O...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Kumar Giri Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1227/2002 RAMESH KUMAR GIRI Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Rajinder Kumar, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through ..... Respondents Mr. Ashish Nischal, Advocate for the UOI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI % ORDER0110.2014 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(ORAL) 1. In the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks i) a writ/ order/ direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the Office Order dated 14.08.2000 by which the petitioner has been denied the pay scale of Rs.5,000-150-8,000/- which his counterparts in the Delhi Police, IB and CBI are getting; and ii) a writ of mandamus to the respondents to implement Para 7 of the Ministry of Finance Resolution No.50(1) 1C/97 dated 30.09.1997, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary and to implement the pay scale of Rs.5,000-150-8,000/- to the post of ASI (Technical), in parity with the petition...
Tag this Judgment!R. Kothandaraman Vs. Lok Sabha Secretariat
Court: Delhi
$~ *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI LPA No.110/2013 Reserved on:19. h September, 2014 Date of Decision:1. t October, 2014 R. KOTHANDARAMAN Through : ..... Appellant Mr. R.K. Saini, Mr. Vivja Nigpal and Mr. Ayush Arora, Advs. versus LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Pramod Gupta, Mr. Umakant Kataria and Ms. Yogita Verma, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HONBLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA GITA MITTAL, J1 By way of the present appeal, the appellant assails the judgment dated 10th of January, 2013 passed by the learned Single Judge. An application dated 6th of June, 2008 by the petitioner seeking to voluntarily retire from the Lok Sabha Secretariat under Rule 48 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 has generated the present litigation. After it stood accepted, the appellant sought to withdraw the voluntary retirement request which was not accepted. The appellants appeal was also rejected by the order dated 20th of November, 2008. These rejections were challe...
Tag this Judgment!