Delhi Court January 2017 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.
Raj Kiran Kaur vs.guru Harkrishan Public School & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2017
* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No.11324/2015 11th January, 2017 RAJ KIRAN KAUR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Goshwami, Advocate with Mr. Sushil Kumar, Advocate. versus GURU HARKRISHAN PUBLIC SCHOOL & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Srivats Kaushal, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Sumit K. Batra, Advocate for respondent No.4. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the relief of payment of monetary benefits by application of 6th Pay Commission Report to teachers of the schools in Delhi in terms of the order of the Director of Education dated 11.2.2009.2. It is seen that the petitioner in this case superannuated from the respondent no.1/school on 31.10.2010. Calculation of the terminal dues including calculation of payment of pension which is to be made is in terms of a specific order wh...
The Managing Committee of Rani Dutta Arya Vidyalaya and Anr. Vs.the Di ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2017
* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No.20218-19/2004 11th January, 2017 THE MANAGING COMMITTEE OF RANI DUTTA ARYA VIDYALAYA AND ANR. ........ Petitioner Mr. G.Tushar Rao, Mr. Mayank Sharma and Mr. Rajiv Trivedi, Advocates. Through: versus THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, GOVT. OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Satyakam, Addl. Standing counsel Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Mr. Pradeep Kaushik, LA Zone, XXVII, DOE, GNCTD for R-1 and 2. Mr. Arvind Kr. Sharma, Adv. for R CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner no.1-school/Rani Dutta Arya Vidyalaya (hereinafter referred to as petitioner-school) impugns the order of the Director of Education dated 15.12.2004 by which the Director of Education has refused to grant approval to the petitioner-school to the resignation of the W.P.(C)...
Shankar Mali & Ors. Vs.achla Singh & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2017
$~3. * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION(CIVIL) No.2559/2015 Date of decision:11. h January, 2017 SHANKAR MALI & ORS. ........ Petitioners Through Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate. versus ACHLA SINGH & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, ASC & Mr. Rizwan, Advocate for GNCTD. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.(ORAL): The petitioners, five in number, by this writ petition have impugned the order dated 15th October, 2014 whereby CP No.530/2013 in OA No.893/2012 filed by them has been dismissed.2. The grievance of the petitioners is alleged non-compliance of the order dated 22nd February, 2013 passed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) in OA No.893/2012, which had directed as under:-"10. In view of the aforementioned particular stand taken by the respondents in para nos. 4.21 and 4.05 of the counter reply and the order dated 28.01.2004 passed...
Union of India & Anr. Vs.sh. Ram Kishore Meena & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2017
* + % IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) No.11601/2015 11th January, 2017 UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. R.V. Sinha, Advocate with Mr. A.S. Singh, Advocate. versus SH. RAM KISHORE MEENA & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Harsh Singhal, Advocate for respondent No.1. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner no.1/Union of India impugns the order dated 30.4.2015 passed by the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes. The only issue to be decided in this writ petition is whether there are judicial powers in the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes to pass an order such as the impugned order dated 30.4.2015. The operative portion of the impugned order dated 30.4.2015 directs that promotion be granted to the post of LDC from the year 2006 to the respondent no.1 herein Sh. Ram Kishore Meena. W....
Anand Singh vs.mamata Shah
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + DECIDED ON : JANUARY112017 CRL.A. 397/2016 ANAND SINGH Through : Appellants son present in person. ..... Appellant versus MAMATA SHAH ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG Through : None. S.P.GARG, J.(ORAL) 1. Present appeal under Section 341 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellant Anand Singh to challenge the legality and correctness of orders dated 14.01.2016 and 17.02.2016 of learned Sr.Civil Judge/Rent Controller.2. I have heard the appellant who appeared in person. The appellant states that he is a former judicial officer from U.P. judiciary.3. At the outset, it may be recorded that in the present appeal the appellant has cast various unwanted, irrelevant and uncalled aspersions which deserve out right rejection. On perusal of the entire appeal, nothing is made out as to which order is under challenge and on what account.4. It reveals that the appellant was inducted as a tenant on a monthly rent of `6,500/- p.m. in ...
Union of India (Uoi) vs.kalyanpur Cements Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:11. h January, 2017 CS(OS) 1433/1999 & IA Nos.1875/2000 (u/O37R-3 CPC), 6363/2000 (u/O37R-4 CPC) & 6388/2000 (for condonation of delay in filing leave to defend) UNION OF INDIA (UOI) Through: Mr. Vijay Joshi, Adv. ..... Plaintiff * % + Versus KALYANPUR CEMENTS LTD. ..... Defendant Through: Mr. Girish Kumar & Ms. Pooja CORAM:-"HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW Singh, Advs. The plaintiff Union of India (UOI) instituted this suit under Order 1. XXXVII of the CPC for recovery of Rs.4,34,78,523/- with future interest from the defendant Kalyanpur Cements Ltd. pleading: (i) That the defendant was a cement producer and cement being a controlled commodity, under the provisions of the Cement Control Order, 1967 read with Sections 18(G) and 25 of the Industries (Development & Regulation) Act, 1951, the ex factory price of the cement produced by the defendant was fixed at Rs.168.91 paise per metric tonne and the said price was modified f...
Brij Mohan Kaeley vs.state (Nct of Delhi) & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2017
+ IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 4694/2016 Date of Hearing & Order: January 11th, 2017 BRIJ MOHAN KAELEY ........ Petitioner Through: Ms.Anu Narula, Ms.Sujata Rao and with Advs. Mr.Kunal Aurora, petitioner in person. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Sudershan Joon, APP with SI Harendra Singh, PS Roop Nagar. Respondent no.2 in person with Mr.Attin Shankar Rastogi, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI P.S.TEJI, J.(Oral) 1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Sh. Brij Mohan Kaeley for quashing of FIR No.316/2015 dated 26.05.2015, under Section 354/354A/506/509/342 IPC registered at Police Station Roop Nagar on the basis of the settlement deed executed between petitioner and respondent no.2 namely, Smt. Ishita Bhatia dated 06.11.2015 after intervention and assistance of Delhi High Court Mediation Centre.2. respondent-State submitted that the respondent No.2 present in the Court has been...
Vijay vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2017
* % + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:17. h October, 2016 Decided on:11. h January, 2017 CRL.A. 866/2012 RAJENDER SINGH @ MONU ..... Appellant Represented by: Mr. A.K. Dubey, Mr. Divyanshu Pratap, Advs. STATE CRL.A. 932/2012 VIJAY STATE versus Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP with ASI Devender Kumar, PS Uttam Nagar. ..... Respondent ..... Appellant Represented by: Ms. Neelam Singh, Adv. versus Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP with ASI Devender Kumar, PS Uttam Nagar. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 By the common impugned judgment dated May 18, 2012 Rajender Singh, Naresh and Vijay have been held guilty for offence punishable under Sections 3IPC besides Rajender Singh was also held guilty for offence punishable under Section 397 IPC. Vide order on sentence dated May 25, 2012 Rajender Singh has been awarded sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years besides imposing a fine of `10,000/- in default whereof...
Machino Polymers Ltd vs.braj Mohan Garg
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2017
$~4 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA1362011 & C.M. No.5912/2016 MACHINO POLYMERS LTD Through: Mr. Prakash Gautam, Advocate ..... Appellant versus BRAJ MOHAN GARG ..... Respondent Through: : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Yadav, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER1101.2017 CM APPL. 48239/2016 (joint application u/O XXIII R3CPC) 1. The present application has been jointly filed by the parties stating inter alia that on 27.10.2016, at the joint request of the counsels for the parties, they were referred to mediation and pursuant thereto, they have arrived at a settlement as recorded in the Settlement Agreement dated 17.12.2016 (Annexure-A) whereunder, the appellant has agreed that the respondent shall be entitled to withdraw the entire amount deposited by it in the Registry, to the tune of Rs.5,43,885/- along with the interest that has accrued thereto.2. Learned counsel for the parties states that the present appeal may be disposed of in terms of the settlement arrived...
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-06 vs.m/s n.c Cables Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-2017
$~77 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgement delivered on:11.01.2017 ITA3352015 PR.COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX-6 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Dileep Shivpuri, Mr. Sanjay Kumar and Mr. Vikrant A. Maheshwari, Advocates. Versus M/S N.C CABLES LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Mr. Somil Agarwal, Mr. Rohit Kumar Gupta and Ms. Monika Ghai, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI S. RAVINDRA BHAT (Oral):-"1. The following questions of law were framed in this case:-"the (a) Did the Tribunal Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) did not in fact record satisfaction under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for issuing notice under Section 147, in the circumstances of the case?. into error in holding that fall (b) Is the impugned order of the Tribunal justified in so far as it directs the deletion of sums brought to tax by the Assessing Officer under Section 68?. 2. The assessee had in its return for the Assessment Year (...
- ‹ Prev
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- Next ›
- Last »