Delhi Court March 1995 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1995 Page 17 of about 169 results (0.023 seconds)Shyam Sunder and Raj Kumar Vs. State (Delhi Admn.)
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IIAD(Delhi)136; 58(1995)DLT505; 1995(33)DRJ511
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) Shri Shyam Sunder and Shri Raj Kumar, the two real brothers, have been convicted of an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, having caused the murder of their step brother Ram Narain vide judgment dated February 28, 1992, of an Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi and vide subsequent order of even date, they have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to a fine of Rs.50.00 each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one day. Shyam Sunder has been also convicted of an offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.50.00 and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one day. Both these convicts have challenged their convictions and sentences by filing the present appeal. (2) Facts of the case, in brief, are that Public Witness 2 Vidyawati, widow of deceased Ram Narain, was living in house No.T-5316, Block...
Tag this Judgment!Khushi Ram Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IIAD(Delhi)77; 1995(33)DRJ558
Mohd. Shamim, J.(1) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30th October, 1979 passed by Shri V.S.Aggarwal, Special Judge, Delhi whereby he found the accused/appellant (hereinafter referred to as appellant for the sake of brevity) guilty of an offence under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced him to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.100.00 under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code. It was further ordered that in case of default of payment of fine the appellant would undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. He was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act with a fine of Rs.100.00 . On his failure to clear the fine he was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. Both the above said sentences were to run concurrently. (2) The case of the prosecution as adumbr...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Sharma Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995(32)DRJ725
Mohd. Shamim, J.(1) This is an application by the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for release on bail in anticipation of his arrest. (2) Learned counsel for the pettitioner, Mr. Mathur, has contended that the petitioner is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is a lawyer by profession. In case he is not released on anticipatory bail his work would suffer further which is already suffering. The prosecutrix Smt. Kamla in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C, has completely exonerated the petitioner inasmuch as she has stated therein that she was having sexual intercourse with the petitioner out of her own free will, without any pressure and coercion. The learned counsel thus contends that in view of the above the petitioner is entitled to an order of bail. (3) Mr. R. D.Jolly, learned Pp for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the bail application. According to him, the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was made under threat whi...
Tag this Judgment!Montari Industries Ltd. Vs. Montari Overseas Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 57(1995)DLT771; 1995(33)DRJ271
R.C. Lahoti, J. (1) MONTARI- a word hitherto unknown to dictionary of languages, howsoever auspiciously and artfully or innocently articulated, is destined to find its place in law reports. (2) The plaintiff `M/S Montari Industries Ltd' having its corporate office at 78, Nehru Place, New Delhi has filed this suit for issuance of permanent preventive injunction restraining the defendant `M/S Montari Overseas Ltd' from using trading or carrying on business in the name and style of M/S Montari Overseas LTD. A mandatory injunction is also sought for commanding the defendant to suitably change its corporate name so as to exclude there from the word MONTARI. An ad interim injunction in similar terms is also sought for. (3) According to the plaintiff, it was registered as Montari Industries Ltd in Punjab on 27.1.1983. Ever since then it has been carrying on its business in the name and style of its name and manufacturing an exhaustive range of articles such as Chemical products, agro- Chemica...
Tag this Judgment!Delhi Development Authority Vs. R.K. Dhawan
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IIAD(Delhi)17; 59(1995)DLT584; 1995(33)DRJ111; 1995RLR369
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) Delhi Development Authority has filed this appeal against the judgment dated February 13, 1981, of an Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, by which he had allowed he appeal of Sh.R.K.Dhawan-respondent and had set aside the judgment dated August 1980 of a Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi and has acquitted the respondent of an offence punishable under Section 29 read with Section 14 of the Delhi Development Act, 1957 (for short 'the Act'). The learned Magistrate has found him guilty and imposed a fine of Rs. 1,500.00 and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 90 days. (2) Facts leading to the filing of the present appeal against acquittal are that the respondent admittedly is the owner of house No.A-16/1, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi, which is located in Development Zone F-12 and in accordance with the Master Plan of Delhi the said house could be used only for residential purposes. (3) Pw 1 S.K.Taneja, Junior Engineer of Delhi Development Authority had on December 18, 1978...
Tag this Judgment!Rajender Nath Chawla Vs. Chairman and ManA. Dir., P.N.B. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IIAD(Delhi)157; 1995(33)DRJ640
P.K. Bahri, J.(1) The petitioner seeks quashing of the letters dated November 4, 1993 and January 13/15, 1990, as being ultra virus of the scope of promotion policy and seeks declaration that the rule which requires rural service as a pre-condition in respect of the petitioner is vocative of Article 14 of the Constitution and he seeks that the petitioner be considered eligible for both Channel-I and Channel-II promotions in MMGS-II scale and respondents be required to declare the result of the petitioner accordingly and give promotion to the petitioner. (2) Facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner had been selected for the post of JMGS-I through a competitive examination and had been confirmed in the said post since December 1982. The service conditions of the officers in the Punjab National Bank are governed by Punjab National Bank Officers' Service Regulations, 1979, in which, inter alia, Regulation No.17 provides 'promotions to all grades of officers in the Bank shall be...
Tag this Judgment!Dalmia Dairy Industries Ltd. Vs. State Trading Corporation of India
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 58(1995)DLT73; 1995(33)DRJ211
Jaspal Singh, J.(1) The Partition of the country in the year 1947 brought in its wake one of the worst disasters that Homo sapiens have faced. It not only uprooted homes, the entire economic fiber too was affected. The suit which has led to the quibbling of these lines too has a history rooted in that period. It starts like this. M/s. Dalmia Cement Ltd. was having a cement producing factory at Dandot. The Partition saw Dandot in West Pakistan. The factory became the center-storm of some pitched legal battles which, however, need not detain us. What is relevant for our purposes is that sometime in the year 1961 the Government of India authorised M/s. Dalmia Cement Company to import cement manufactured by them at their said factory at Dandot. The import license was issued in the name of the defendant State Trading Corporation with a letter of authority in the name of M/s. Dalmia Cement Company who imported the cement into India and distributed the same. The entire operation was completed...
Tag this Judgment!P. Jhunjhunwala Vs. United Bank of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995(33)DRJ70
C.M. Nayar, J.(1) The petitioner has moved this Court by means of writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the records relating to charge sheet No. PD/DIR/2321/89 dated 7/12th August, 1989 issued by the General Manager (Credit), Disciplinary Authority, United Bank of India, the enquiry proceedings and the order of punishment No.PD/DIR/890A dated 30.3.1991 issued by the Disciplinary Authority and quash the same. (2) The brief facts are that the petitioner joined the respondent Bank on June 1, 1974 as Law Officer. He was holding the post of Assistant General Manager (Legal) in the Legal Department of the respondent bank at the relevant time. It is further stated that the petitioner is entitled to the use of an office car and in case an office car was not available, he could hire a car on the basis of office circular dated April 16, 1982. The petitioner received a letter dated Sept...
Tag this Judgment!Shanti Devi Vs. D.N. Sood and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 1995IAD(Delhi)1228; 58(1995)DLT11
Arun Kumar, J.(1) By this petition, the petitioner landlady has challenged an order dated 22/09/1992 passed by the Additional Rent Controller,Delhi granting leave to defend the eviction petition to the respondent tenant.Briefly, the facts giving rise to the petition are that the petitioner filed an eviction petition under Section 14D read with Sub-section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') for eviction of the respondent on21.3.1990. The case of petitioner is that she is a widow. She is the owner landlady of the tenancy premises which is in occupation of the respondent. The said premises was let out by the petitioner's husband to the respondent for residential purpose only. The premises is required by the petitioner for her own residence as she has no other residential accommodation. The husband of the petitioner died in the year 1981leaving behind a Will bequeathing therein half of the property bearing No. B-12,West End, New Delhi in favor of the petit...
Tag this Judgment!