Delhi Court December 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.
Sandisk Corporation Vs. M/S Shivji Electronics and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Order delivered on:16. h December, 2014 % + CS (OS) No.2642/2012 SANDISK CORPORATION Through ..... Plaintiff Ms. Shwetasree Majumder and Mr. Prithvi Singh, Advs. versus M/S SHIVJI ELECTRONICS & ORS. Through None. ....Defendants CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiff has filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark SanDisk, copyright, passing off, rendition of accounts of profits, damages and delivery up against the defendants.2. The suit along with interim application was listed before Court on 31st August, 2012. After hearing, detailed ex-parte ad interim injunction order was passed restraining the defendants, their partners, servants, agents, representatives etc. from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale such products, that infringe the plaintiffs trademarks, SanDisk and its SanDisk logo and/or are identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs product packaged and s...
Bank of India Vs. The Ld. Presiding officer Cgit Delhi and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-16-2014
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:- 16th December, 2014 % + W.P.(C) No.718/2003 BANK OF INDIA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Rajat Arora, Adv. Versus THE LD. PRESIDING OFFICER CGIT DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Leena Tuteja, Adv. for R-2. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugns the Award dated 3rd October, 2002 of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, New Delhi in I.D.No.17/1994, answering the following reference:Whether the action of the Management of Bank of India in dismissing Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Agricultural Assistant from service w.e.f. 5th October, 1992 is justified?. If not, what relief is the workman entitled to?. in favour of the respondent no.2 workman and setting aside the order dated 5th October, 1992 of the Disciplinary Authority of the petitioner Bank (of dismissal of the respondent no.2 workman from the services of the petitioner Bank and of recovery...
Anil Kumar Sheel Vs. Asst. Labour Commissioner and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: December 15, 2014 + W.P.(C) 7317/2014 ANIL KUMAR SHEEL Represented by: Petitioner Mr. Rajiv Agarwal and Mr. Sachin Sharma, Advocates. ASST. LABOUR COMMISSIONER & ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.V.K.Tandon and Mr. Yogesh Saini, Advocates for Respondent No.1. Mr. Parvinder Chauhan, Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks directions thereby directing the respondent No.2 to implement the award dated 20.09.2006 passed in I.D. No.41/06 (Old I.D. No.44/01) by the Industrial Tribunal No.I, New Delhi.2. Mr. Rajiv Agarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioner joined the respondent No.2 as LDC w.e.f. 20.10.1995 on monthly paid/muster roll worker and accordingly paid wages as fixed and revised from time to time under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The services of the petitioner were termi...
Competent Security Services Vs. Govt of Nct of Delhi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: December 15, 2014 + W.P. (C) No.1660/2011 COMPETENT SECURITY SERVICES ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. A.K. Singla, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Naresh Daksh and Mr. Sheetesh Khanna, Advs. versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS Represented by: NEMO. ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. The present petition is directed against the impugned award dated 06.09.2010 whereby the respondent No.2 / workman was granted reinstatement with 50% back wages and continuity of service.2. Mr. A.K. Singla, ld. Sr. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that respondent No.2 was appointed as Masson. As per his letter of appointment, which is at Page 8 of the petition, he was directed to work at Maurya Sheraton Hotel w.e.f 03.05.2001. As per the terms of appointment, absence for a continuous period of 10 days (including absence for which leave though applied for but not granted) and when oversta...
Anil Kumar Sheel Vs. Asst. Labour Commissioner and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: December 15, 2014 + W.P.(C) 7317/2014 ANIL KUMAR SHEEL Represented by: Petitioner Mr. Rajiv Agarwal and Mr. Sachin Sharma, Advocates. ASST. LABOUR COMMISSIONER & ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.V.K.Tandon and Mr. Yogesh Saini, Advocates for Respondent No.1. Mr. Parvinder Chauhan, Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks directions thereby directing the respondent No.2 to implement the award dated 20.09.2006 passed in I.D. No.41/06 (Old I.D. No.44/01) by the Industrial Tribunal No.I, New Delhi.2. Mr. Rajiv Agarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioner joined the respondent No.2 as LDC w.e.f. 20.10.1995 on monthly paid/muster roll worker and accordingly paid wages as fixed and revised from time to time under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The services of the petitioner were termi...
Apex Traders Vs. Satnam Sales Corporation and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 2425/2010 Decided on:15. h December, 2014 % APEX TRADERS Through ..... Petitioner Mr. Abhinash Kr. Mishra, Mr. S.S. Mishra, Advs. versus SATNAM SALES CORPORATION & ORS ..... Respondent Through Mohd. Zahid, Adv. for R-2&3. Mr.Yogesh Verma, APP for State. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner filed a complaint before the learned ACMM impleading the respondents No.1 to 4 as accused. The complainant alleged that in the month of June/July 2007 since he was in need of scrap he checked certain websites including Alibaba.com. There he came across the number of respondent No.4 Abhinav Goel who introduced the petitioner with respondents No.1 to 3 and that they were dealers in ferrous and non-ferrous scrap metals. Respondent No.2&3 representing to be partners of respondent No.1 agreed to supply H.R./C.R. cutting 250.m.t. @ `18,700/- m.t. in a lot of 100 m.t. The delivery of the aforesaid items were agree...
Competent Security Services Vs. Govt of Nct of Delhi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: December 15, 2014 + W.P. (C) No.1660/2011 COMPETENT SECURITY SERVICES ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. A.K. Singla, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Naresh Daksh and Mr. Sheetesh Khanna, Advs. versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS Represented by: NEMO. ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. The present petition is directed against the impugned award dated 06.09.2010 whereby the respondent No.2 / workman was granted reinstatement with 50% back wages and continuity of service.2. Mr. A.K. Singla, ld. Sr. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that respondent No.2 was appointed as Masson. As per his letter of appointment, which is at Page 8 of the petition, he was directed to work at Maurya Sheraton Hotel w.e.f 03.05.2001. As per the terms of appointment, absence for a continuous period of 10 days (including absence for which leave though applied for but not granted) and when oversta...
Vinod Kumar Bakshi Vs. Rajan Kapoor and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : December 15, 2014 + FAO(OS) 140/2014 VINOD KUMAR BAKSHI Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Rajesh Gogna, Advocate versus RAJAN KAPOOR & ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Vikas Dhawan, Advocate with Mr.S.Panda, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral) 1. Vide order dated November 26, 2013 various applications have been decided by the learned Single Judge, two of which are IA No.853/2013 and IA No.11351/2013. Whereas IA No.853/2013 was filed by plaintiff No.1, IA No.11351/2013 jointly by plaintiff No.2 and defendants No.1 and 3. The former application was filed under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the latter was filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. IA No.853/2013 has been allowed. Decree on admission has been passed in favour of plaintiff No.1. IA No.11351/2013 has been dismissed.2. Laying a challenge ...
Ravi Seikhar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:15. h December, 2014 + CRL.A. 1063/2011 RAVI SEIKHAR Through: versus ..... Appellant Mr. K. K. Manan, Adv. STATE Through: + CRL.A. 1274/2011 MOHD.TARIQULLAH Through: versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through: + .... Appellant Mr. Abdul Sattar, Adv. ..... Respondent Mr. M.N. Dudeja, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State along with SI Jitender Police Station Kalkaji CRL.A. 1078/2011 MOHD.RIZWAN Through: versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through: + ..... Respondent Mr. M.N. Dudeja, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State along with SI Jitender Police Station Kalkaji ..... Appellant Mr. Abdul Sattar, Adv. ..... Respondent Mr. M.N. Dudeja, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State along with SI Jitender Police Station Kalkaji CRL.A. 1081/2011 AFZAL HUSSAIN Through: versus STATE NCT OF DELHI Through: Crl.A.1063, 1274, 1078,1081/2011 & 1010/2012 ..... Appellant Mr. Abdul Sattar, Adv. ..... Respondent Mr. M.N. Dudeja, Additional Public Prosec...
Anubhav Kathuria Vs. Govt of Nct of Delhi and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-2014
$~ 54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:15. 12.2014 W.P.(C) 7773/2014 ANUBHAV KATHURIA .... Petitioner versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Ravinder Sethi, Sr. Adv.with Mr Makhan & Mr D.R. Kaushik For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi. Mr Arjun Pant for DDA. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE I. S. MEHTA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. An additional affidavit handed over by Mr Jain on behalf of respondent no.2 is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit and would be relying on the averments made in the writ petition.2. 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. W.P....
- ‹ Prev
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- Next ›
- Last »