Delhi Court February 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.
Mother Dairy (Now Known as Fruit and Vegetable Pvt. Vs. Arvind Kumar A ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2015
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:6. h February, 2015 + W.P.(C) 6311/2014 & CM. No.15240/2014 MOTHER DAIRY (NOW KNOWN AS FRUIT & VEGETABLE PVT. LTD.).. Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Lalit Bhasin, Ms. Ratna S. Dhingra and Ms. Bhavna Dhami, Advocates. ARVIND KUMAR ARORA Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr. Jitin Sahni and Mr. Vikas Yadav, Advocates. Versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.W.P.(C) 6311/2014 1. The present petition is directed against the award dated 07.07.2014 passed by the Labour Court in ID No.216/2010 (old ID No.03/2005), whereby the learned Labour Court held that dismissal of the workman is not justified as the same is excessive punishment. Accordingly, while setting aside the order of dismissal of workman from service, the learned Labour Court directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent in service without any back wages.2. The petitioner has also assailed the order dated 21.08.2008, whereby the Labour C...
Vikas Yadav Vs. State of Up
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:24. h December, 2014 Date of Decision:06. h February, 2015 % + CRL.A.910/2008 VIKAS YADAV Through: ..... Appellant Mr.Sumeet Verma, Adv. with Mr.Amit Kala,Adv. versus STATE OF UP Through : + ..... Respondent Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Mr.P.K. Dey, Adv. with Mr.Kaushik Dey, Mr. Abhijeet, Mr. Vijay Pal Singh and Mr. Andleeb Naqvi, Advs. for complainant. CRL.A.741/2008 VISHAL YADAV Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Sanjay Jain and Mr. Vinay Arora, Advs. versus STATE GOVT. OF UP ....Respondents Through : Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Mr.P.K. Dey, Adv. with Mr.Kaushik Dey, Mr. Abhijeet, Mr. Vijay Pal Singh and Mr. Andleeb Naqvi, Advs. for complainant. Crl.A.Nos.910, 741, 958/2008, Crl.Rev.P.No.369/2008, Crl.A.Nos.1322/2011 & 145/2012 pg. 1 + CRL.A.958/2008 STATE Through : ..... Appellant Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, Adv. with Ms. Shinjan Jain, Adv. for State. Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP for ...
Himanshu @ Chinu Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : FEBRUARY02 2015 DECIDED ON : FEBRUARY06 2015 + CRL.A. 1446/2014 & Crl.M.B.10776/2014 HIMANSHU @ CHINU ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Jivesh Tiwari, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP. SI Joginder Singh, P.S.Shalimar Bagh. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to a judgment dated 15.12.2012 in Sessions Case No.6/10 arising out of FIR No.303/09 registered at Police Station Shalimar Bagh by which the appellant-Himanshu @ Chinu was held guilty for committing offence under Section 376 IPC. By an order dated 22.12.2012 the appellant was awarded Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years with fine `5,000/-.2. Allegations against the appellant, as projected in the charge- sheet, were that on 12.10.2009 at about 08:00 p.m. after kidnapping the prosecutrix X (assumed name), he took her in a garden/park near Sahipur village, Shalimar Bagh and committed rape on her person. D...
Krishna Vs. State (Govt. of Nct) of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON : FEBRUARY04 2015 DECIDED ON : FEBRUARY06 2015 + CRL.A.979/2013 KRISHNA ..... Appellant Through : Mr.Krishan Kumar with Ms.Sunita Arora, Advocates. VERSUS STATE (GOVT.OF NCT) OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to a judgment dated 06.04.2013 in Sessions Case No.07/13 arising out of FIR No.33/10 registered at Police Station K.N.Katju Marg by which the appellant-Krishna was held guilty for committing offences under Sections 458/324/376/506/392 IPC. By an order dated 12.04.2013 he was awarded various prison terms with fine. All the sentences were to operate concurrently.2. Allegations against the appellant, as projected in the charge- sheet were that on 20.02.10 at 11:30 p.m. after committing lurking house trespass in House No.635, Sector 26, Rohini, he sexually assaulted X (assumed name), aged 13 years, putting her in fear and inflicted...
Pramod Kumar Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : February 06, 2015 + W.P.(C) 2275/2012 PRAMOD KUMAR Represented by: ..... Petitioner Mr.D.K.Sharma, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Rajan Sabharwal, Advocate with Mr.Raghav Sabharwal, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The Ministry of Railways issued an advertisement, published in the Employment News 14-20 November, 2009 inviting applications for appointment by direct recruitment to the post of Inspector (Prosecution) and Sub-Inspector (Prosecution). Of the 58 vacancies notified for the post of Inspector (Prosecution), 6 were shown as reserved for ex-servicemen. Of the 7 vacancies notified for the post of Sub-Inspector (Prosecution), 1 was shown as reserved for ex-servicemen.2. The only concession shown towards ex-servicemen in the advertisement was the relaxation in age as per orders issued by the Governmen...
M/S Avinash Em Projects Private Limited Vs. M/S Gail (India) Limited
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2015
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:06. 02.2015 W.P.(C) 2041/2014 & CM Nos. 4256/2014 & 14287/2014 M/S AVINASH EM PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner versus M/S GAIL (INDIA) LIMITED ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Sanjiv Kakra, Ms Vaishali Kakra , Mr Bheem Sain Jain, Mr Varun Gowda and Mr Rohit Oberoi. For the Respondents : Mr Parag Tripathi, Sr. Advocate with Mr Pragyan Sharma, Ms Kanika Tandon and Mr Nitihesh Kumar. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order of the respondent dated 18.03.2014 (variously referred to as the blacklisting order or the impugned order) whereby the respondent has banned the petitioner for an indefinite period from doing any future projects with the respondent or participating in bidding process for any of its tenders in future. The said decision is subject to review after a period of ten years.2....
Castrol Limited and Anr Vs. Mr. Harshal Mahajan and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Judgment :06.02.2015. CS(OS) 86/2008 & I.A. No.598/2008 (under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 of the CPC) CASTROL LIMITED & ANR Through ..... Plaintiffs Mr. Sushant Singh, Adv. versus MR. HARSHAL MAHAJAN & ORS ..... Defendants Through None. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.(Oral) 1 Present suit has been filed by the two plaintiffs. Castrol Limited is plaintiff No.1, having its registered office at United Kingdon. Plaintiff No.2 Castrol India Ltd. is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 in India carrying on business on large scale and extensively in processing and trading in automotive and industrial lubricants, greases and other speciality products. The plaintiff No.1 is the registered proprietor of trademark CASTROL registered in India vide registration No.260626 in class 4 dated 17.11.1969 in respect of industrial oils and greases, hydraulic fluids being oils, lubricants etc. It is also the regi...
Abhipra Capital Ltd. and Ors. Vs. State and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2015
$~ 9 & 10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: February 06, 2015 + (i) CRL.M.C. 1014/2014 ABHIPRA CAPITAL LTD & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Rahul Gupta, Mr. S. Tabrez and Mr. Shekhar Gupta, Advocates versus STATE & ANR Through: + (ii) .....Respondents Mr.Naveen Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with SI Rakesh Mr.Shekhar Das, Advocate with respondent No.2 in person CRL.M.C. 1015/2014 ABHIPRA CAPITAL LTD & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Rahul Gupta, Mr. S. Tabrez and Mr. Shekhar Gupta, Advocates versus STATE & ANR Through: .....Respondents Mr.Naveen Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondentState with SI Rakesh Mr.Shekhar Das, Advocate with respondent No.2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR CRL.M.C. 1014 & 1015 of 2014 Page 1 JUDGMENT (ORAL) % In the above-captioned two petitions, quashing of two FIRs i.e. FIR No.829/2006 [in CRL.M.C.1014/2014]. and FIR No.825/2006 [in CRL.M.C. 1015/2014]. both under Sections 40...
Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, (South) Vs. M/S. Shalom Restaur ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:20. h January, 2015 Date of Decision:6. h February, 2015 % + W.P.(C) 5937/2013 ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, (SOUTH) ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ram Narayan Singh, Advocate. versus M/S. SHALOM RESTAURANT .....Respondent Through: Mr. Abhay Pratap Singh, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VED PRAKASH VAISH JUDGMENT1 By the present petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner assails order dated 18.05.2012 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal in ATA No.50(4)2010 whereby the order dated 26.11.2009 passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization directing the respondent to deposit the damages (account wise) for the period 02/2005 to 10/2006 was held as an unreasonable order passed in a mechanical manner and was, therefore, quashed.2. The concise facts of the case are that the respondent was a unit ...
Idha Iron and Steel Company Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2015
$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4154/2013 IDHA IRON AND STEEL COMPANY LTD AND ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Naveen Kumar and Mr. Sudeep Dey, Advocates versus % UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Abhay Prakash Sahay, CGSC with Mr.Deepak Gupta, Advocate for R-1 Mr. Apoorv Kurup, Mr.A.P. Mayee and Mr.Rohit Rathi, Advocates for R-2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER ORDER0602.2015 1. This is a writ petition which challenges the order dated 17.02.2012 passed by the Central Government.2. The grievance of the petitioners arises in the background of the following brief facts :2.1 On 10.08.2006, the State Government of Chhattisgarh had notified an area admeasuring 1000 sq. kms. in District North Baster, Kanker, Chhattisgarh, as an area vacant for grant of Reconnaissance Permit (in short RP) for diamond, gold, copper, nickel and other base metals as also platinum group of minerals. 2.2 Consequent thereto, on 25.08.2006, in the Gazette of the...
- ‹ Prev
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- Next ›
- Last »