Court : Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h December, 2014 % + WP(C) No.150/2002 NEW GREEN FIELD PUBLIC SCHOOL .. Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashish Garg & Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Advs. Versus THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITY & ORS. .. Respondents Through: None. CORAM:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The petition impugns the order dated 18th July, 2001, of the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (Gratuity Act) in proceeding No.G21/2000/Sough Region/5675 initiated by the respondent No.3 Mrs. P. Satyavani, rejecting the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner of the said respondent No.3 employed as a Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) with the petitioner School being not an employee within the meaning of Section 2(e) of the Gratuity Act and resultantly, holding the proceeding initiated by the respondent No.3 Mrs. P. Satyavani to be maintainable and listing it for evidence.2. The petitioner preferred an appeal to the Appellate Authority under the Gratu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2012(3)LLN267(DB)
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J. (Open Court) CM.A. 17440/2010 1. The Appellant seeks restoration of appeal i.e. Letters Patent Appeal which was dismissed by an order dated 09.11.2009. Repeated attempts to serve the Respondent- workman, were unsuccessful. The Court permitted substituted service upon the Respondent by an order dated 24.08.2011. The order dated 15.12.2011 recorded satisfaction that citation with regard to service upon second Respondent through publication was filed. In these circumstance, service of notice is complete. We have heard the counsel for the Applicant. This Court notices that the Respondent- workman had been represented till 21.07.2008, when he was permitted to withdraw the sum deposited in Court. Having regard to the over all circumstances, we are of the opinion, that in the interests of justice, the application should be allowed. CM.A. 17440/2010 is accordingly allowed. The appeal is directed to be restored to its original number on the file. CM. A. 17440/2010 is allo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON :11. h DECEMBER, 2017 DECIDED ON :12. h JANUARY, 2018 FAO2092016 & CM Nos.17269/2016 & 20941/2016 ASHOKA TRANSWAYS SERVICES (P) LTD...... Appellant Through : Mr.Prakash Khandelwal, Advocate. versus RAMESH CHANDER Through : Mr.R.K.Nain, Advocate. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG + S.P.GARG, J.1. Present appeal has been preferred by Ashoka Transways Services (P) Ltd. (hereinafter the appellant) to challenge the legality and correctness of an order dated 07.03.2016 of the learned Commissioner under Section 22 of the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter the Act) whereby the respondent was given compensation amount of `1,95,468/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from one month after the date of accident i.e. 29.10.2012. The appeal is contested by the respondent.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. The respondent filed claim petition under Section 22 of the Act. It...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:20. h September, 2017 + W.P.(C) 1558/2017 ARCHANA SHASTRI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Amit Goel, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Vivek Goyal, CGSC with Mr. Harsh Pandit, Adv. for R-1 Mr. Pratap Shanker, Mr. Swetank Shantanu and Ms. A. Shivani, Adv. + W.P.(C) 1559/2017 D.K. BATRA ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Amit Goel, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Vivek Goyal, CGSC with Mr. Harsh Pandit, Adv. for R-1 Mr. Pratap Shanker, Mr. Swetank Shantanu and Ms. A. Shivani, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI WP(C) Nos.1558/2017 & 1559/2017 Page 1 of 14 REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL) 1. The present writ petitions are disposed of by this common order since the same involve identical facts and issues. For the sake of convenience and brevity, facts in W.P.(C) 1558/2017 are being noted.2. W.P.(C) 1558/2017 assails order...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:22. 04.2016 Pronounced on:02. 12.2016 + W.P.(C) 250/2009 PRABHAT AGRI BIOTECH LTD. AND ANR. Petitioners REGISTRAR OF PLANT VARIETIES AND ORS...Respondents Versus + W.P.(C) 7102/2011, C.M. APPL.16215/2011 & 18367/2012 KAVERI SEED COMPANY LTD. REGISTRAR OF PLANT VARIETIES AND ANR....Respondents Petitioner Versus Through: Sh. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Abhishek Saket, Ms. Vijaya Singh and Sh. Manish Madhukar, Advocates, for petitioners. Sh. Pravin Anand with Ms. Geetanjali Viswanathan, Ms. Neeti Wilson and Ms. Asavari Jain, Advocates, for interveners. Sh. Anil Dutt and Sh. Sudershan. S. Sekhawat, Advocates, for Maharashtra Hybrid Seed Co. Ltd. Sh. H.S. Chandhoke and Sh. Shivi Sethi, Advocates, for Respondent No.3 in W.P.(C) 250/2009. Dr. Ashwani Bharadwaj, Advocate, for Respondent No.1 in W.P.(C) 250/2009. Sh. Dev. P. Bhardwaj, CGSC with Ms. Anubha Bhardwaj, Advocate, in W.P.(C) 7102/2011. for UOI, CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h December, 2014 % + WP(C) No.150/2002 NEW GREEN FIELD PUBLIC SCHOOL .. Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashish Garg & Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Advs. Versus THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITY & ORS. .. Respondents Through: None. CORAM:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The petition impugns the order dated 18th July, 2001, of the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (Gratuity Act) in proceeding No.G21/2000/Sough Region/5675 initiated by the respondent No.3 Mrs. P. Satyavani, rejecting the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner of the said respondent No.3 employed as a Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) with the petitioner School being not an employee within the meaning of Section 2(e) of the Gratuity Act and resultantly, holding the proceeding initiated by the respondent No.3 Mrs. P. Satyavani to be maintainable and listing it for evidence.2. The petitioner preferred an appeal to the Appellate Authority under the Gratu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:5. h December, 2014 % + WP(C) No.150/2002 NEW GREEN FIELD PUBLIC SCHOOL .. Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashish Garg & Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Advs. Versus THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITY & ORS. .. Respondents Through: None. CORAM:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 The petition impugns the order dated 18th July, 2001, of the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (Gratuity Act) in proceeding No.G21/2000/Sough Region/5675 initiated by the respondent No.3 Mrs. P. Satyavani, rejecting the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner of the said respondent No.3 employed as a Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) with the petitioner School being not an employee within the meaning of Section 2(e) of the Gratuity Act and resultantly, holding the proceeding initiated by the respondent No.3 Mrs. P. Satyavani to be maintainable and listing it for evidence.2. The petitioner preferred an appeal to the Appellate Authority under the Gratu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2003VIAD(Delhi)205; 104(2003)DLT918; 2003(68)DRJ552; (2003)IIILLJ143Del
Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the legality of the award passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. 1, Delhi in ID case No. 7/1992. The workman/respondent No. 2 was appointed on 19.5.1982 as a Retainer Crew Driver by the Delhi Transport Corporation. He was appointed on monthly rates of pay on temporary basis and was on probation for a period of one year vide order dated 2.2.1983. The respondent No. 2 continued to be on probation when his service was terminated by the petitioner Corporation under Clause 9(a)(i) of the DRTA (Conditions of Appointment and Services) Regulation 1952.2. On 19.7.1991, the respondent No. 2 served a demand notice for reinstatement and subsequently raised an industrial dispute. The appropriate Government referred the said dispute for adjudication on the following terms of reference:'Whether the termination of services of Shri Kartar Singh is illegal and/or unjustified and, if so, to what relief is ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Reported in : (1991)37ITD86(Delhi)
1. These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the Assessing Officer. All these appeals involve a common point. Except I.T.A. No. 834 (Asr.) of 1989 relating to the assessment year 1984-85, which arose out of the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263, all the other appeals arise out of the orders passed by the Commissioner (A) under Section 250(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. For the assessment year 1984-85 there are two appeals, one filed against the order passed by the Commissioner (A) under Section 250(4) which is a regular assessment and the other against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Both the appeals involve the same point. For that reason all the appeals are consolidated for disposal by a common order.2. The common issue in all these appeals is, whether the income derived by the assessee trust could be regarded as agricultural income or could be regarded as income...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI3d December, 2019 Date of decision:10. h October, 2019 CS(OS) 1020/2009 & IA No.386/2019 (u/O VIII R-1A(3) CPC) VESTA HOLDING PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. ..... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Suhail Dutt, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Azhar Alam, Mr. Sankalp Goswami, Advs. Versus AKM ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. .... Defendants Through: Mr. Abhinav Vasisht, Sr. Adv. with Mr. S.K. Dubey, Mr. Rajmangal Kumar and Mrs. Akshita Sachdev, Advs. AND + CS(OS) 1016/2010 & IA No.389/2019 (u/O VII R-14 CPC) AKM ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LTD ..... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Abhinav Vasisht, Sr. Adv. with Mr. S.K. Dubey, Mr. Rajmangal Kumar and Mrs. Akshita Sachdev, Advs. Versus VESTA HOLDING PRIVATE LTD & ANR ..... Defendants Through: Mr. Suhail Dutt, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Azhar Alam, Mr. Sankalp Goswami, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW1 CS(OS) No.1020/2009, as per amended plaint dated 22nd October, 2011, is filed for recovery of Rs.28,12,50,000/- along with pendente...
Tag this Judgment!