Delhi Court January 2018 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.
Manoj Kumar vs.union of India & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: January 24, 2018 + W.P.(C) 5279/2017 & C.M. 22382/2017 1. MANOJ KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Ranjit Sharma, Advocate Versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Brajesh Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr. A. Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.2 Respondent No.3 through father. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT ORAL In pursuance to vacancy Circular/Advertisement (Annexure P-1), petitioner and respondent No.3-Hemlata Bawa had applied for the post of Primary Teacher in the Scheduled Caste Category. As per Circular/Advertisement (Annexure P-1), after the written test, eligible candidates were required to submit the requisite documents and thereafter, interview was to be held for the reserved post of Primary Teacher in question.2. Learned counsel for respondent-Institute informs that Circular/Advertisement (Annexure P-1) was issued in March, 2016, which was followed by a Notice of 27th Ap...
State of Nct of Delhi vs.ishwar Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:24. h January, 2018 CRL.L.P. 163/2016 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ........ Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Amit Gupta, APP for State with SI Ram Niwas, PS J.P. Kalan. versus ISHWAR SINGH ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Prem Chhetri, Advocate with respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.(ORAL) Crl. M.A. No.4307/2016 (Delay) 1. For the reasons stated in the application delay of 61 days in filing the leave to appeal petition is condoned.2. Application is disposed of. CRL.L.P. 163/2016 1. Challenging the impugned judgment dated 5th October, 2015 acquitting the respondent for offence punishable under Sections 279/304A IPC the State seeks leave to appeal.2. Process of law was set into motion on 15th April, 2007 on receipt of DD No.4A regarding an accident. HC Satyawan reached the hospital however, the injured was found unfit for statement and also did not find any eye witness in the hospital. HC Satyaw...
Raja Ram vs.delhi Transport Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-2018
$~43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 709/2018 & C.M. Nos. 3043-44/2018 1. RAJA RAM Through: Mr. Atul T.N., Advocate. ........ Petitioner versus DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Through: None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI % ORDER2401.2018 The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment dated 03.11.2017 whereby the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has dismissed his O.A. No.347/2016.2. A brief glance at the relevant facts of the case is considered necessary. The petitioner had joined the respondent/DTC on 03.2.1977, as a Conductor. On issuance of a charge sheet to him for embezzlement of funds and after holding an inquiry against him, the services of the petitioner were terminated vide order dated 28.10.1992. Aggrieved by the said termination order, the petitioner had raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Industrial Tribunal. The Industrial Tribunal passed an order dated 27.1.2003, setting aside the...
Saurabh Bagley vs.tajinder Babra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % SAURABH BAGLEY RFA No.79/2018 24th January, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Pankaj Sinha and Mr.Anurag Ojha, Advocates. versus TAJINDER BABRA ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) RFA No.79/2018 and C.M. Appl. Nos. 3041/2018 (for stay), 3042/2018 (for condonation of delay of 692 days in filing the appeal) 1. This Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed by the defendant in the suit impugning the judgment of the trial court dated 4.11.2015 by which the trial court has decreed the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for a sum of Rs.4,39,930.50 along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. The suit is decreed on account of the balance price of the work done as an interior decorator but not paid by the RFA No.79/2018 Page 1 of 5 appellant/defendant who had engaged the respondent/plaintiff for the inter...
Prem Prakash Chaudhary vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-2018
........ Petitioner ..... Respondent versus Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner STATE $~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:24. 01.2018 BAIL APPLN.157 /2018 PREM PRAKASH CHAUDHARY : Mr. Mohinder Nath Dudeja, Mr Anuj Chauhan and Mr Nitin Sharma. For the Respondent : Ms Anita Abraham, APP. Mr Ram Kumar and Mr L.K.Dixit for complainant. SI Shubhangi, PS Preet Vihar. the CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2401.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.286/2017 under SectionsIPC, Police Station Preet Vihar.2. The allegation in the FIR is that the complainant and petitioner knew each other since September, 2015 and came in contact through Facebook.... Petitioner and complainant kept up the contact over phone. It is alleged that on 15.09.2015, complainant went to the Hospital, where petitioner was employed, for treatment of an ailment. On the way back, the petitioner is Bail Appl...
Director of Wealth Tax vs.hersh W. Chadha
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-2018
$~73 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WTA92006 Date of decision:24. 01.2018 DIRECTOR OF WEALTH TAX ........ Petitioner Through Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Adv. versus HERSH W.CHADHA ..... Respondent Through Ms. Kavita Jha and Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (ORAL) % The following questions of law were framed in the instant Wealth Tax appeal :1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the value of the property bearing No.E-l, Placeno Estate, Bombay, declared by the Assessee was the correct fair market value of the property as on the relevant valuation date?.2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the value of the Mercedes Benz Car could not be included in the net wealth of the Assessee?. WTA92006 Page 1 of 8 2. The necessary facts are that in the Wealth Tax Returns for Assessment Year 1992-93, the declared net worth was `35,29,000/-. The a...
Naresh Kumar & Anr vs.the Hon’ble Registrar General Delhi High Court
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI $~46 * + W.P.(C) 746/2018 NARESH KUMAR & ANR Through: Mr.D.K.Sharma, Advocate ........ Petitioners versus THE HONBLE REGISTAR GENERAL DELHI HIGH COURT CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HONBLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI Through: Mr.Chaitanya Puri, Advocate for Mr.Rajshekhar Rao, Advocate ..... Respondent % 1. ORDER2401.2018 The present petition has been filed by the two petitioners praying inter alia for issuing a writ of Mandamus to the respondent/DHC directing that they may be permitted to appear in the Delhi Higher Judicial Service Examination, 2017, by granting them age relaxation.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on 23.12.2017, the High Court of Delhi had invited applications from eligible candidates for filling up 11 vacancies by way of direct recruitment in the Delhi Higher Judicial Service, by holding Delhi Higher Judicial Service Examination. Some of the terms and conditions of eligibility are as follows:-"A candidate sh...
Nhai vs.m/s. Bsc-Rbm-Pati Joint Venture
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:31st October, 2017 Pronounced on:24. h January, 2018 + FAO (OS) (COMM) 107/2017& CM Nos.18458-59/2017 NHAI Through: Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ujjawal Jha and Mr. Prateik Gaur, Advocates. ........ Petitioner M/S. BSC-RBM-PATI JOINT VENTURE . Respondent Versus Through: Mr. Pravin H. Pareksh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Vishal Prasad, Ms. Raveena Rai and Ms. Swati Bhardwaj, Advocates. CORAM: HONBLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT % C. HARI SHANKAR, J.1 The present appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, preferred at the instance of the National Highways Authority of India (hereinafter referred to as the appellant), challenges the judgement, dated 3rd January 2017, of the learned Single Judge, in OMP (Comm.) 232/2016. The said FAO (OS) (COMM) 107/2017 Page 1 of 45 OMP, filed under Section 34 of the Act by the appellant, sought to challenge award, dated 10th Octob...
Sarat Chandra Padhi vs.national Council of Teachers Education
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-2018
* + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: January 24, 2018 W.P.(C) 715/2018 & CM30662018 SARAT CHANDRA PADHI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Gautam Kumar Laha and Mr. Rajvardhan Singh, Advocates versus NATIONAL COUNCIL OF TEACHERS EDUCATION CORAM: Through: Ms. Sonali Malhotra, Advocate ..... Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL) In partial modification of Office Order of 8th August, 2014 (Annexure P-2), petitioner was engaged as a full-time Consultant (Legal) by respondent on contract basis for a period of six months or till further orders, whichever is earlier.... Petitioners engagement as full-time Consultant (Legal) had commenced on 22nd May, 2015. Vide Office Order of 17th May, 2017 (Annexure P-3), petitioners engagement as full- time Consultant (Legal) was renewed by respondent for further period of six months from 21st May, 2017 or till further orders, whichever is earlier.2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioners engagement ...
Pankaj Dixit & Ors vs.m/s k.b.s.h. Export House & Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-2018
$~6 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Judgment:24. 01.2018 W.P. (C) 6701/2014 PANKAJ DIXIT & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr.Vijay Kinger, Advocate with Ms.Roopa Nagpal, Advocate. versus M/S K.B.S.H. EXPORT HOUSE & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL VINOD GOEL, J.(ORAL) 1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the impugned exparte Award dated 02.07.2010 in case ID No.714/2016 by which the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-XVI, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Industrial Adjudicator) answered the reference No.F- 24(3567)/2004/Lab./6842-46 dated 29.03.2005 made to it by the Government of NCT of Delhi under Section 10(1)(c) and 12 (5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in brief ID Act) against the petitioners. The said reference reads as under: - Whether the services of Pankaj Dixit & 3 Ors. have been terminated illegally and/or unjustifiably by the management if so, to what ...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »