Delhi Court January 2015 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.
Hav Rakesh Saini Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on : January 19, 2015 Judgment Pronounced on : January 21, 2015 + W.P.(C) 562/2015 HAV DADASO SAMPATRAO PHADTARE ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.S.S.Pandey, Advocate with Mr.H.S.Tiwari, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Arjun Mitra, Advocate for R-1 to R-3 W.P.(C) 563/2015 HAV RAVINDRA SINGH Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.S.S.Pandey, Advocate with Mr.H.S.Tiwari, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Arjun Mitra, Advocate for R-1 to R-3 W.P.(C) 565/2015 HAV CHAVHAN HEMANAND KRISHNA ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.S.S.Pandey, Advocate with Mr.H.S.Tiwari, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS W.P.(C) Nos.562/2015 & conn.matters Represented by: Mr.Arjun Mitra, Advocate for R-1 to R-3 W.P.(C) 566/2015 HAV RAKESH SAINI Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.S.S.Pandey, Advocate with Mr.H.S.Tiwari, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS Represented...
Shri Ravinder Kumar Jha and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reservedon:02. 09.2014 Pronounced on:21. 01.2015 + W.P.(C) 209/2013, C.M. NOS.439/2013, 10048/2013, 14089/2013, 2708/2014, 7494/2014, 7498/2014 & 10251-10253/2014 SHRI RAVINDER KUMAR JHA AND ORS..Petitioners Through: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Padma Kumar, Sh. Sameer Sharma and Sh. Amandeep Joshi, Advocates. Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Through: Sh. N. Nageshwar Rao, ASG with Sh. Kirtiman Singh, CGSC with Sh. Waize Alinoor, Advocates, for UOI. Sh. M.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate, for Respondent Nos. 3 to 37. Sh. Sandeep. P. Aggarwal with Ms. Soumyaajit Pani, Advocate, for impleaded respondents. Sh. Amit Gupta, Advocate, for the applicants in C.M. No.10251/2014. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. The petitioners are aggrieved by an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 27-09-2012 in OA2482012. The W.P.(C) 209/2013 Page 1 present writ petitione...
Balmukand and Anr Vs. Anuj Kumar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 544/2013 Reserved on:13. h January, 2015 Decided on:21. t January, 2015 % BALMUKAND & ANR Through ..... Petitioners Petitioners in person. versus ANUJ KUMAR Through ..... Respondent Mr. Sanjeev Sindhwani, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rakesh Saini and Mr. Uday Joshi, Advs. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Vide order dated 17th July, 2012 the eviction petition filed by the petitioners was allowed under Section 14(1)(d) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (for short the Act) and an eviction order was passed in respect of the suit premises i.e. two rooms and open courtyard at ground floor at 10343/7784, Gali No.3, Ram Nagar, Paharganj, New Delhi shown in red colour in the site plan Ex. PW2/11, however the eviction petition to the extent it sought vacation of the suit premises under Section 14(1)(h) of the DRC Act was dismissed as not maintainable.2. The order dated 17th July, 2012 passed by the Ld. Additional Rent Controller (a...
Ramesh Kc Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
* % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on : January 12, 2015 Judgment Pronounced on : January 21, 2015 + W.P.(C) 5373/2012 RAMESH KC Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.Alok Kishore, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.A.K.Gautam, Advocate W.P.(C) 5374/2012 EX.NK.JYOTI KANTA MAHAPATRA ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Alok Kishore, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.A.K.Gautam, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. In the two captioned writ petitions, two separate orders, both dated May 04, 2012, passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) Delhi Bench passed in T.A.No.164 of 2010 and T.A.175 of 2010 have been impugned whereby the petitions filed by the petitioners have been dismissed on the view taken by the Tribunal that the petitions are devoid of any merit. In both the petitions before the Tribunal, the petiti...
M/S Rameshwar Dass and Sons (Huf) Vs. M/S Caravel Logistics Pvt. Ltd. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : December 11, 2014 DECIDED ON : January 21, 2015 + CS(OS) 2492/2012 M/S RAMESHWAR DASS & SONS (HUF) Through : ..... Plaintiffs Mr.Aditya Singh, Advocate. VERSUS M/S CARAVEL LOGISTICS PVT. LTD. & ANR. ..... Defendants Through : Mr.C.N.Sreekumar, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.IA No.3075/2014 (u/S8of Arbitration Act) 1. The plaintiffs have instituted the instant suit for recovery of ` 26,67,230/- for the loss suffered on account of fault attributed to the defendants.2. In the instant application the defendant No.1 has averred that there was an arbitration agreement between the parties to refer the dispute within the limits of Chennai. This fact finds mention in various invoices filed on record by the plaintiffs. The claim is contested by the plaintiffs.3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Learned counsel for the defendant No.1 urged that invoices filed on recor...
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd Vs. Public Power Corporation S.A and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 2054/2012 Reserved on: Date of decision:06. 01.2015 21.01.2015 IN THE MATTER OF: BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Prashant Mehta, Mr. Himanshu Kapoor, Ms. Harleen Singh and Mr. Abhimanyu Walia, Advocates versus PUBLIC POWER CORPORATION S.A & ORS ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Sumeet Lall, Advocate with Mr. Jayant Malik and Ms. Anu Goel, Advocates for D-2. Mr. R.P. Vats, Advocate for D-3/Bank. CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J.I.A. 16803/2014 (by the defendant No.2 u/O VII R10r/w Order VII R11CPC) 1. The present application has been filed by the defendant No.2 praying inter alia that the plaintiff/BHELs plaint be returned/rejected on the ground that the present suit is barred by law in view of clause 20 of the General terms and conditions of the Contract dated 05.02.2009 that stipulates that the courts in Athens would have the exclusive jurisdiction to settle ...
Naresh Kumar Sharma Vs. Union of India and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:23. d December, 2014 Judgment Pronounced on:21. t January, 2015 W.P.(C) 269/2001 NARESH KUMAR SHARMA Through: ..... Petitioner Ms. Rekha Palli & Ms. Punam Singh, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR Through: ..... Respondents Mr. K.R. Gupta and Mr. Chandra Nand Jha, Advocates for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 06.04.1998, passed by Youth Hostels Association of India (hereinafter referred to as respondent No.2) whereby his services were terminated and for passing of any other or further orders in the circumstances of the case.2. The facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioner was appointed as Accounts Assistant with Respondent No.2 on 25.04.1975 and was promoted to the post of Programme Assistant and then to t...
Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Ved Prakash @ Pappi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:8. h January, 2015 Date of Decision:21. t January,2015 % + W.P.(C) No.1235/2012 DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Sarfaraz Khan, Advocate. versus VED PRAKASH @ PAPPI .....Respondent Through: Mr.S.C. Singhal, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH JUDGMENT1 This petition is directed against award dated 01.11.2011 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-XVII, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in LCA No.16/2009 wherein the petitioner/management was directed to pay the entire arrears of salary and allowance to the respondent/workman for the period of his suspension from 08.11.1996 to 16.09.2001(after adjusting any amount paid by it to the workman as suspension/subsistence allowance or otherwise) along with a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards the cost.2. Shorn off unnecessary details, the facts of the present case are that the respondent was working with the petitioner as Assistant Fitter. He was involve...
Svec Construcitons Ltd. Vs. Bhartiya Rail Bijlee Company Ltd. and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision : January 21, 2015 + FAO(OS) 36/2015 SVEC CONSTRUCTIONS LTD. ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms.Prerna Singh, Advocate with Mr.Guntur Pramod Kumar and Mr.Prashant Mathur, Advocates versus BHARTIYA RAIL BIJLEE COMPANY LTD. & ANR. Represented by: None ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(ORAL) CM No.1228-29/2015 Allowed. FAO (OS) No.36/2015 1. The law concerning grant of an injunction on a bank guarantee could be stated thus : if egregious fraud or irretrievable injury or special equity could be shown, then alone would a Court be justified in granting an injunction to restrain the beneficiary from invoking the bank guarantee, and if invoked, to restrain the issuing bank from paying under the bank guarantee.2. 'Fraud', 'irretrievable injury' and 'special equity' are expressions found in a catena of judicial opinions penned by Learned and Honbl...
Air Liquide North India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Inox Air Products Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-21-2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ARB.P. 410/2013 AIR LIQUIDE NORTH INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Atul Chitale, Senior Advocate with Mrs. Sanyukta Mukherjee, Advocate. versus INOX AIR PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajiv Bansal with Mr. Saurabh Suman Sinha and Ms. Arpita, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER2101.2015 1. This is a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (Act) seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.2. The facts that are not in dispute are that a Sale and Purchase agreement dated 14th/19th December 2009 (hereafter 'Agreement') was entered into between the Petitioner and the Respondent with the Petitioner being the Seller and the Respondent being Buyer in respect liquid Oxygen and liquid Nitrogen which were to be supplied to the Buyer at its manufacturing facility in Panipat.3. Relevant to the present petition is the following clause occurring in the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »