Delhi Court October 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.
Munish Kumar Sharma vs.anmesh Kumar Rai
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA No.872/2018 + % MUNISH KUMAR SHARMA26h October, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Prakash Gautam, Advocate with Mr. Vivek Ojha, Advocate. ANMESH KUMAR RAI versus Through: ..... Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) Caveat No.976/2018 1. No one appears for the caveator. Caveat stands discharged. C.M. No.44442/2018(exemption) Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. C.M. stands disposed of.2. RFA No.872/2018 Page 1 of 10 RFA No.872/2018 and C.M. No.44441/2018(stay) 3. 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 07.08.2018 by which trial court has decreed the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 22,94,600/- comprising of the figure of the principal loan amount of Rs. 14,90,000/- and the balance amount as interes...
Deepak Pal vs.the State (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi) & Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~25 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:25. h October, 2018 CRL. M.C. 5410/2018 and Crl.M.A.34859/2018 DEEPAK PAL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Prem Chand Gangania, versus Advocate THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State with asi Yashpal Singh, PS Karawal Nagar. Ms. Pinki Talukdar, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. On the basis of final report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) submitted upon conclusion of investigation into first information report (FIR) No.708/2015 of Police Station Karawal Nagar, the petitioner herein is facing prosecution for offences punishable under Sectionsof the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The gravamen of the charge against the petitioner in the said case is that on 10.12.2015 at about 7:30 p.m. he had driven a motor vehicle described as a car baring registration No.DL-2CAM- 5933 in a rash or negligent mann...
Elofic Industries Limited & Anr vs.mobis India Limited and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
* % + CPC) & 1718/2016 (u/O VII R-11 CPC) ELOFIC INDUSTRIES LIMITED & ANR MOBIS INDIA LIMITED AND ANR Through: Mr. Surinder Singh, Adv. Versus ..... Plaintiffs IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:25. h October, 2018 CS(COMM) 17/2016 & IAs No.387/2016 (u/O XXXIX R-1&2 ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Manish Biala and Mr. Ashutosh Upadhyaya, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 This suit was filed by the plaintiffs claiming the following reliefs: i. An order and decree of declaration be passed in favour of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendants, its directors, partners, promoters as the case may be and its officers, representatives, agents, assignees, distributors, licenses, private investigators, market surveyors and all others acting for and on their behalf to the effect that the threats are unjustified and groundless and that the alleged infringement for the trademarks and copyright which the threats relate to, does not amount to infringement of an...
Ved Prakash vs.d.t.c.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on:07. 09.2018 Date of Judgment:25. 10.2018 WP (C) 6200/2002 VED PRAKASH D.T.C. Through: Mr. Vinay Sabharwal, ........ Petitioner Advocate. versus... RESPONDENTThrough: Mr. Uday N.Tiwari and Ms.Nishtha Girotra, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL VINOD GOEL, J.1. The petitioner/workman by this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the basis of the order dated 27th March, 2002 seeks for a direction to the management to allow him to join duty and pay him back wages from the date of his illegal termination. The respondent filed WP(C) No.7536/2002 challenging this order dated 27.03.2002 by which the Industrial Tribunal (Tribunal) had rejected its approval application under Section 33 (2) (b) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act) for termination of service of the petitioner. By a separate judgment of even date, WP(C) No.7536/2002 has been dismissed by this Court. WP (C) 6200/2002 Page 1 of ...
Hari Shankar Chaturvedi vs.the National Textile Corpn. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:09. h March, 2018 Pronounced on:25. h October, 2018 + W.P. (C) 183/2004 1. HARI SHANKAR CHATURVEDI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Vidya Sagar, Advocate. versus THE NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPN. LTD. ... Respondent Through: Mr. Preet Pal Singh and Ms. Priyam Mehta, Advs. With Mr. Rajesh Bhambri, Deputy Manager, NTC CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR % The petitioner Hari Shankar Chaturvedi was appointed as JUDGMENT Cashier-cum-Accounts Clerk, in the office of the respondent, on 20th October, 1975. He was, thereafter, promoted as Assistant Manager, Grade-III with effect from 25th May, 1988.2. On 29th January, 2002, the petitioner was visited with a charge- sheet, proposing holding of an inquiry, against him, under Rule 25 of the National Textile Corporation (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). W.P.(C) 183/2004 Page 1 of 14 3. The charge-sheet contained a single Article of Charge, which read ...
Prateek Kumar vs.state of Nct of Delhi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~13 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL. M.C. 2348/2016 PRATEEK KUMAR Decided on:25. h October, 2018 ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State with ASI Tulli Ram, PS Badarpur. Mr. G.A. Khan, Adv. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner had filed a criminal complaint in the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate seeking criminal action against the second to fourth respondents seeking direction to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). It appears from the pleadings that the second respondent is his wife, they having been married on 10.12.2012, the marital relationship having gone into rough weather, he, inter alia, alleging that the second respondent had been in an illicit relationship with the third respondent prior to the marriage of the parties. He mad...
Technical Executive Officers a vs.union of India & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:25. 10.2018 + W.P.(C) 12926-27/2006 TECHNICAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERS A ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.Shanker Raju and Mr.Nilansh Gaur, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.Kanish Rana for Mr.Anuj Aggarwal, ASC for R-2 and R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(ORAL) 1. The petitioner associations grievance is that the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) by its impugned order rejected the claim made for parity of pay scales as between various cadres of the Motor Vehicle Department in the NCT of Delhi (Motor Licensing Officers (MLOs), Motor Vehicle Inspectors (MVIs), Road Safety Inspectors (RSIs) and Driving Test Inspectors (DTIs). It was argued that the pay scales of these cadres, were identical with those granted to public employees holding similar or identical posts in the Motor Vehicle Department in other States and Union Te...
Nathi Ram vs.delhi Transport Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on :19. 09.2017 Date of decision:25.10.2018 W.P.(C) 2335/2010 NATHI RAM ........ Petitioner Through Ms.Satvinder Kaur, Advocate versus DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sarfaraz Khan, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA JUDGMENT ANU MALHOTRA, J.1. The petitioner seeks the setting aside of the impugned order and the award dated 20.5.2018 and 11.7.2018 respectively of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court (Fast Track)-XXI, Karkardooma Delhi, in ID No.570/and seeks his reinstatement in the services of the respondent with full back wages.2. Vide the impugned order dated 20.5.2018, the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court (Fast Track)- XXI, Karkardooma Delhi, disposed of the inquiry qua the issue: Whether the management has not conducted a fair and proper enquiry in accordance with the principles of natural justice?. against the workman i.e., the petitioner herein and in favour of the management ...
Dr. s.k. Bansal vs.uoi & Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:23. d February, 2018 Date of Decision:25. h October, 2018 + W.P.(C) 248/2003 Dr. S.K. BANSAL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Piyush Sharma, Adv. versus UOI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. J.P. Cama, Senior Adv. with Mr. R.G. Srivastava, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT1 The petitioner was appointed as geophysicist, with the Oil and Natural Gas Commission (Respondent No.2 herein and referred to, hereinafter, as ONGC), on 3rd April, 1984, and was posted at Dehradun. On 6th July, 1984, he was transferred, along with the post, to the Delhi office of the ONGC, vide Office Order dated 27th April, 1984.2. Vide Office Order dated 27th March, 1987, the petitioner was re-transferred to Dehradun. According to the petitioner, during his stay at Dehradun, he developed kidney trouble, for which he was referred to the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), at Delhi. W.P.(C) 248/2003 Page 1 of 33 3. As...
Food Corporation of India vs.m/s Shankar Rice and General Mills & Othe ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-2018
$~34 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:25. h October, 2018 O.M.P. 534/2012 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA Through: Mr. Mohan Lal Sharma, Advocate (M-9811537909). ........ Petitioner versus M/S SHANKAR RICE AND GENERAL MILLS & OTHERS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) The present petition under Section 34 of 1. the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenges the award dated 19th December, 2011 passed by the Learned Sole Arbitrator. The... Petitioner Food Corporation of India (hereinafter, FCI) and 2. M/s Shankar Rice and General Mills (hereinafter miller) had entered into two milling agreements dated 8th November, 1994 and 15th November, 1994. Under the said contracts, the miller was to mill the paddy and supply the rice to the... Petitioner. The total quantity of paddy of superfine, fine and common varieties was 31,791 bags containing 29687.94 quintals of paddy. The performance of the miller in m...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »