This is an appeal from a judgment, dated 5th February, 2003, rendered by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in CWP No.2278/2002. By the impugned judgment, the High Court has upheld the validity of the Delhi Race Course Licensing (Amendment) Rules, ..
Both sides would agree that the issues raised and the relief sought for in this appeal are identical with the issues raised and considered by this Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Giani in Civil Appeal No.1884/2011 on February 17, 2011. 5. In ..
Mr. Pamaljeet Singh is sole proprietor of M/s Friends Overseas (plaintiff). In fact, sole proprietorship firm has no separate legal entity and is a creation of its sole proprietor, thus, any reference made to sole proprietorship firm shall mean and i..
Petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh petition after impleading all the necessary parties. Permission, as above, is granted...
Respondent No.1 filed Writ Petition No.11 of 1995 for quashing tender notice dated 20.12.1994 on the ground that the same was contrary to the Zonal Development Plan prepared under the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 and prayed that a ma..
The appellants did not file application under Section 18 of the Act for determination of compensation by the Court, but after amendment of the Act with effect from 24.9.1984 and disposal of the references made at the instance of other landowners, the..
M/s. Kay Jay Constructions Company Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter described as, ‘the company’) (respondent No.4 in the appeal arising out of SLP (C) No.1758 of 2011) was granted permission by the appellant in 2006 for raising construction on property bearing..
Coastal Andhra Power Limited (‘CAPL’) has filed this petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘Act’) against the Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution Company Limited (‘APCPDCL’), Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distrib..
The petitioner has approached this Court with certain grievances with regard to the amount payable to the second/third respondent. In view of the intervening developments, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction, prays for an opportunity t..
The facts, as disclosed from the record, in a nut-shell are that the original applicant was initially recruited as Supporting Staff Grade-I on 25.7.1979 by the 1st respondent and subsequently promoted as Supporting Staff Grade-II on 4.10.1996. In the..
It has been stated that Baba Pritam Shah executed his last Will dated 15.8.2011 in favour of Dharma Shah. The Will was scribed by Sanjeev Kumar and attested by Nikka Ram and Kewal Krishan. The complainant Satpal reported the matter to the police on t..
On 07.01.1990, the appellant-Society (first defendant), the owner of the property situated at Door No. 35, Lock Street, Kottur, Chennai entered into an Agreement for Sale of the property in favour of one S. Velayutham - 2nd defendant in the suit on t..
The only question raised in this writ petition, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, is as to whether FIR lodged under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against the petitioner herein to..
The respondent-workman’s case was that his transfer to Jaipur was mala fide. He had raised an industrial dispute challenging his transfer and that dispute came to be referred to the Industrial Tribunal by the appropriate Government. The industrial tr..
The facts, as disclosed from the record, in a nutshell are that the petitioner was initially engaged as a helper/tyreman in the petitioner Corporation on 4.9.1997, on monthly remuneration of Rs.1500/-. He was asked to execute an agreement in the mont..
On 3.12.2010, this Court expressed the view that the petitioners have not taken steps to implement the notification and directed their counsel to make a statement on the issue of closure of all commercial and tourist establishments within the Buffer ..
The case of the petitioners in W.P.(C.) No. 2775/2012 is that petitioner No. 1 Global Vectra Helicorp Ltd. (herein referred to as Global Vectra) is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. Petitioner No. 2 is a Citizen of India and working..
The submission of learned ASG Sh. A.S. Chandhiok, firstly, is that a perusal of the impugned order shows that the CIC has equated donations made by the President with subsidy, which is not the case. It is also submitted that the learned CIC has not d..
Facts: These appeals have been filed by the Union Territory of Lakshadweep against an order dated 16th January, 2012 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam whereby the High Court has directed the appellants to process the applications mad..
This intra court appeal impugns the order dated 22nd December, 2010 of the learned Single Judge dismissing in limine WP(C) No. 8558/2010 preferred by the appellant. The said writ petition was preferred impugning the decision dated 12th November, 2010..
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
