Delhi Court February 2019 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2019 Page 19 of about 750 results (0.014 seconds)Anish Gupta vs.union of India & Anr.
Court: Delhi
$~10 * % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:21. 02.2019 W.P.(C) 4134/2016 ANISH GUPTA Through: Mr. Prateek ........ Petitioner Tushar Mohanty, Ms.Payal Mohanty and Mr. Tushar Ranjan Mohanty, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Ms. Bharathi Raju, CGSC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA VIPIN SANGHI, J.(ORAL) 1. The short issue that arises for consideration in the present petition assailing the order dated 22.04.2016 passed in O.A. No.1395/2016 is whether the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (Tribunal), was justified in requiring the petitioner to await the outcome of the enquiry proceedings for the purpose of determining as to how the period of his suspension should be treated for the purposes of his pay and allowances, and, whether the said period of suspension should be treated as spent on duty, or not.2. The petitioner was placed under suspension on 21.08.2013. His s...
Tag this Judgment!Karan Mahajan and Ors. Vs.board of Control for Cricket in India & Ors.
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:21. 02.2019 + W.P.(C) 9484/2018 & CM APPL. 36887/2018, 47280/2018, 48393/2018 KARAN MAHAJAN AND ORS. versus BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS. Advocates who appeared in this case: ........ Petitioners ........ RESPONDENTS For the... Petitioners: Mr Aditya Kr Choudhary, Mr Gurmehar Vaan Singh and Mr Amit Pratap. For the... RESPONDENTS: Mr Parag P. Tripathi, Senior Advocate with Mr Vikash Kumar Jha, Ms Nikitha Shenoy and Mr Laukaksh Joshi. CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioners have filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning a letter dated 03.05.2018(hereafter the Impugned Letter) addressed by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to the Railway Sports Promotion Board (hereafter RSPB). The petitioners also impugn RSPBs reply to the impugned letter dated 25.06.2018. W.P.(C) 9484/2018 Page 1 of 12 Further, the petitioners pray that directions be issued to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Rain Cii Carbon (Vizag) Ltd. & Anr. Vs.union of India & Anr.
Court: Delhi
$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1460/2019 % RAIN CII CARBON (VIZAG) LTD. & ANR. ........ Petitioners Through: Mr P. Chidambaram, Sr. Advocate, Mr Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr Jafar Alam, Mr Samsudha Majumdar and Ms Shivani Khandekar, Advocates. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr Jasmeet Singh, CGSC with Mr Praveen Kumar Jain, Advocate along with Mr Abdul Sadiq of respondent No.2. Khan, TDO CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU ORDER2102.2019 VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the petition is taken up for hearing and has been finally heard.2. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning the Minutes of the Meeting (impugned minutes) held on 12.12.2018, between the officials of the Directorate General of W.P. (C) 1460 of 2019 Page 1 of 10 Foreign Trade (DGFT); the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change; the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas ...
Tag this Judgment!R. L. Khullar Rep. As Lrs of Late Smt. Prakash Khullar vs.government o ...
Court: Delhi
$~2 to 41 & 57 to 67 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * + W.P.(C) 7757/2018 R. L. KHULLAR REP. AS LRS OF LATE SMT. PRAKASH KHULLAR Through: Mr. Vijay Kumar and Mr. Thomas ........ Petitioner Oommen, Advocates. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain and Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for LAC/L&B. Ms. Mrinalini Sen and Ms. Kritika Gupta, Advocates for DDA. + W.P.(C) 8111/2018 WITH GEETA MITTAL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Thomas Oommen, Advocate. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain and Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for LAC/L&B. Mr. Arun Birbal, Advocate for DDA. + W.P.(C) 8115/2018 SANJAY TANDON ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Thomas Oommen, Advocate. versus W.P.(C) 7757/2018 & connected matters Page 1 of 37 GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain and Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for LAC/L&B. Ms. Mrinalini Sen and Ms. Kritika Gupta, Advocates...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. s.p. Kaushal vs.anil Kumar Misra & Anr
Court: Delhi
$~6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 1482/2018 Decided on:21. t February, 2019 Dr. S.P. KAUSHAL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Gogna and Mr. Upendra Sai, Advocates versus ANIL KUMAR MISRA & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Kunal Kalra, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has been a tenant in the premises described as bearing no.B-1/502, Janak Puri, New Delhi, statedly since 1984 at the initial rent of Rs.1,200/- p.m., which he admits was increased to Rs.1,500/- p.m., the late father of the respondents herein being the person who had so inducted him being the landlord. The respondents, having stepped into the shoes of their father after his death, instituted a suit for possession and recovery of arrears of rent / damages with interest, pendente lite and future, against the petitioner, inter alia, pleading the rent to have been subsequently increased to Rs.4,000/- Crl. M.C. No.1482/2018 Page 1 of 4 p.m. The suit (no...
Tag this Judgment!Sushil Kumar vs.state
Court: Delhi
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:21. 02.2019 CRL. REV. P. 1085/2018 & Crl. M.A. 48874/2018, 48876/2018, 49618/2018 & 3966/2019 SUSHIL KUMAR STATE versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : For the Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, Addl. PP for the State with Inspr. Braj Mr. G. Ramakrishna Prasad and Ms. Filza Moonis, Advs. Mohan CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner impugns order dated 14.11.2018 whereby the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was rejected.2.... Petitioner further seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.4/2015 under Sections 13(1)(d) Prevention of Corruption Act read with Section 420/409/120B IPC, Police Station Anticorruption Branch.3. The allegations in the FIR are that need for emergent repair of a Sewage Pump was wrongfully shown and a fictitious bill created for repair done where, in fact, there was n...
Tag this Judgment!Aman Nagrath vs.devender Mandal
Court: Delhi
AMAN NAGRATH + W.P.(C) 1244/2017 & CM APPL. 5671/2017 DEVENDER MANDAL Through None. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL) 1. ..... Respondent $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: -21.02.2019 ........ Petitioner Through Mr. M.Y. Khan, Adv. Vide the present petition under Articleof the Constitution of India the petitioner, the Director of M/s Meyer Seals India Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Company) impugns the order dated 18.11.2016 passed by the Authority under Delhi Shops & Establishment Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), whereunder he has been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 21,910/- along with an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the respondent.2. It may be noted that despite service, none appears for the respondent. In these circumstances I have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and, with his assistance, perused the record. WP (C) No.1244/2017 Page 1 of 5 3. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Satnam Singh vs.state & Another
Court: Delhi
* + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 21, 2019 CRL.M.C. 4017/2017 & CRL.M.A. 16179/2017 SATNAM SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh Popli, Mr. Mukul Girdhar and Mr. Anuj Yadav, Advocates versus STATE & ANOTHER .....Respondents Through: Ms. Neelam Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor with Inspector Kanchan Mr. Chetan Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. R.S.Chaggar and Ms. Sangeeta Singh, Advocates for respondent No.2 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL)... Petitioner is the brother of deceased-Mandeep Kaur, who was married to respondent No.2-Maninder Singh (as per amended memo of parties) on 7th December, 2014. Deceased-Mandeep Kaur, aged 24 years, had died unnatural death in her matrimonial house on 3rd May, 2016, regarding which FIR for the offence under Sections 304B/498-A/34 was registered against second respondent, his mother and sister. After filing of the charge-sheet, trial court vide impugned order of 7th June, 2017, orde...
Tag this Judgment!Santosh vs.state
Court: Delhi
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:21. 02.2019 BAIL APPLN. 2816/2018 SANTOSH STATE versus ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner : Ms.Rebecca John, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Sumit Chaudhary, Mr.Kushdeep Gaur, and Ms.Megha Bahl, Advs. For the Respondent: Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP with Insp.Ram Avtar, P.S.Kanjhawala. Mr.S.P.Sharma, Adv. for the complainant. CORAM:-"HONBLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.427/2018 under Sections 308/3IPC, Police Station Kanjhawala. Subsequently on the death of the injured, Section 302 IPC has been added.2. The allegations in the FIR are that the complainant along with his mother and father were going to their field and working there. They share a common field with the petitioner and her family and there was earlier also a dispute with regard to sharing of water. It is alleged that on the day of t...
Tag this Judgment!S. Surjit Singh Sahani vs.state & Anr
Court: Delhi
16 $~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI TEST.CAS. 27/2018 & I.A. 6245/2018 S. SURJIT SINGH SAHANI ........ Petitioner Through Ms. Monica Sharma, Advocate. versus STATE & ANR Through None. ......... RESPONDENTS % Date of Decision:21. t February, 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. Today in Court, learned counsel for petitioner has handed over an additional affidavit of Smt. Maninder Kaur, real sister of the testatrix, which is taken on record.2. It is pertinent to mention that present petition has been filed under Section 276 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 for grant of probate in respect of Will dated 27th April, 1987, of late Mrs. Gian Kaur wife of late Shri S. Rattan Singh Khanpuri.3. In the petition it has been averred that the petitioner is the sole beneficiary under the Will dated 27th April, 1987 and is the nephew of TEST.CAS.27/2018 Page 1 of 7 the testatrix, late Mrs. Gian Kaur wife, who expired on 02nd April, 2011 in New Delhi. The...
Tag this Judgment!