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.
Ram Karan Vs. Uoi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-05-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: December 08, 2014 Pronounced on: January 05, 2015 + RSA662013 RAM KARAN Through: .....Appellant Mr.Puneet Verma, Advocate Through: ..... Respondents Roshan Lal Goel, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT Appellants suit for declaration and mandatory injunction qua his dismissal from service stood decreed by trial court but the first appellate court vide impugned judgment has reversed the trial courts judgment and has dismissed appellants suit while holding that principles of natural justice have been complied with. Factual narration finds mention in the impugned judgment and it needs no reproduction. Suffice it would be to note that appellant was a constable in Central Reserve Police Force and on 12 th April, 1985, he was detained at E-Coy Quarter Guard at Mehrauli, Delhi and on checking by DSP Joginder Singh, appellant was found absent from duty. On account of the aforesaid absence from the duty...
Mc-Rotem-Melco Consortium and Ors. Vs. M/S Delhi Metro Rail Corporatio ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-05-2015
$~R-8. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:02. 07.2014 % + Judgment delivered on:05. 01.2015 O.M.P. 304/2007 MC-ROTEM-MELCO CONSORTIUM & ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Parag Tripathi, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Anuj Berry, Mr.Malak Bhatt, Mr. Manu Nair & Mr. Sagar Suri, Advocates. versus M/S DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED ..... Respondent Through: Mr. M.G. Ramachandran, Mr Rakesh Agarwal & Mr. Pulkit Agarwal, Advocates along with Mr.A.S. Rao, Law Officer, DMRC. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI JUDGEMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. This petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been preferred to assail the interim/ partial award dated 04.04.2007 passed by a three member arbitral tribunal. The dispute between the parties arose out of the differences pertaining to the quantum of deduction that could be made from the fixed lump sum price of the project, on account of exemption from...
University of Delhi Vs. Rattan Mala Ahuja and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-05-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.50 /2015 Date of decision:05. h January, 2015 UNIVERSITY OF DELHI Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. G.K. Pathak, Advocate Versus RATTAN MALA AHUJA & ORS. Through: ..... Respondents Mr. Ajay Digpaul, CGSC for R-2,3, 5 & 6. Mr. Saurabh Dev Karan Singh, Adv. for R-4/UGC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH VED PRAKASH VAISH, J.(ORAL) CM852015(exemption) The exemption application is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) No.50 /2015 1. By way of this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 31.03.2014 passed by learned Appellate Authority and order dated 11.04.2013 passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed.2. Mr. Ajay Digpaul, Advocate enters appearance on advance notice on behalf of respondents No.2,3,5 & 6. Mr. Saurabh Dev Karan S...
Master Tarnpreet Singh Virk Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-05-2015
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:05. 01.2015 W.P.(C) 6863/2014 MASTER TARNPREET SINGH VIRK ..... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Amrit Kaur Oberai, Mr Shubham Jain and Ms Jesica Gill. For the Respondent : Mr Rajesh Ggna, CGSC for UOI Mr Amit Bansal and Ms Seema Dolo for R2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner impugns a memo dated 22.05.2014 (hereafter the impugned order) issued by the respondent no.2 imposing a penalty on the petitioner for adopting unfair means; the petitioners result for the XIIth standard board examination taken by him in March, 2014 has been cancelled.2. The impugned order was passed as the Unfair Means Committee had found that the petitioner had submitted examination forms from two schools simultaneously and it is alleged that the same would have resulted in undue benefit to the petitioner.3. The...
Shri Harish Kumar Bhateja Vs. Shri Bhagwan Dass and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-05-2015
$~A-1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision:05. 01.2015 CS(OS) 1114/2008 SHRI HARISH KUMAR BHATEJA ..... Plaintiff Through Mr.Rajeev Saxena, Advocate. versus SHRI BHAGWAN DASS & ORS. ..... Defendants Through Mr.Promod Ahuja, Advocate for the appellants in O.A.219/2014/D-1 to 10. Ms.Gita Dhingra, Advocate for D-11 & 12. Mr.R.K. Bedi, Advocate for D-13 & 14. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(Oral) I.A. No.20529/2014 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. I.A. No.20530/2014 (for condonation of delay in filing of O.A.) For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 18 days in filing of the O.A. is condoned. The application is disposed of. O.A.219/2014 (for setting aside of order dated 23.08.2014) 1. This is an appeal filed under Rule 4 Chapter II of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1967 seeking to set aside the impugned order dated 23.08.2014 passed by the Joint Registrar dismissing the application of d...
Surender Malik Vs. Raj Bala and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-05-2015
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1944/2012 Date of decision:05.01.2015 SURENDER MALIK Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. N. K. Aggarwal, Advocate versus RAJ BALA & ORS Through: ..... Defendants None CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH JAYANT NATH, J.(ORAL) IA No.12383/2013 (under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC filed by the plaintiff) 1. This is an application under Order 8 Rule 10 CPC filed by the plaintiff seeking striking out the defence of the defendants and for passing of judgment and decree.2. It is stated that the plaintiff has filed the present suit for specific performance, ejectment/recovery of possession, recovery of usage charges, damages pertaining to property bearing Plot No.C-120-A, area measuring 137.1/2 (137.5) Sq. Yds. out of Khasra No.731 min to 733, situated in the revenue estate of Village Nawada, Delhi State in the abadi known as Mohan Garden, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-110059.3. It is stated that on 20.07.2012 this Court passed the status quo with regard to tit...
Union of India Vs. Lalit Kumar (Retd.)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-05-2015
$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of hearing & Order:5. h January 2015. + W.P.(C) 6276/2013 UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Petitioner Ms. Anita Pandey, Advocate versus LALIT KUMAR (RETD.) Through: ..... Respondent In person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA ORDER % 05.01.2015 KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.(ORAL) 1. By this petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks to issue a writ of certiorari and to set aside the impugned order dated 19.4.2012 passed in R.A. No.192/2012 and order dated 10.1.2012 passed in O.A. No.436/2009 by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal.2. The brief facts of the present petition are that the respondent - Lalit Kumar had joined in Civil Construction Wing, All India Radio, under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting as Junior Engineer (Electrical) on 13.04.1972 and was promoted to the post of AE (E) on regular basis on 25.7.1980. Vide order bearing No.A-22...
- ‹ Prev
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- Next ›