Delhi Court January 2005 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.
Smt. Taruna Batra W/O Shri Amit Batra D/O Shri Shore Lal Vs. S.R. Batr ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Delhi270; 116(2005)DLT646; I(2005)DMC282; 2005(79)DRJ717
Madan B. Lokur, J.1. The controversy that I am called upon to decide in the present case under Article 227 of the Constitution essentially relates to the situs of the matrimonial home of the Petitioner, who is the daughter in law of the Respondents.2. The Petitioner was married to Amit Batra on 14th April 2000. They have a male child born on 27th November 2001. Soon after their marriage, as per the prevailing practice, the Petitioner shifted into the home of Amit Batra and the Respondents, that is, in the ground floor of property No. B-135, Ashok Vihar, Phase I, Delhi. The entire property belongs to the Respondents but all of them lived together on the ground floor.3. It seems that sometime in early 2002, relations between the parties deteriorated. According to the Petitioner, the Respondents treated her cruelly, and so the Petitioner and Amit Batra later shifted to the second floor of the said property, which became their matrimonial home. However, it appears that their shifting to th...
Narender Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ2735; 117(2005)DLT51
Manju Goel, J.1. This revision petition is under Sections 397/401 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the order and judgment dated 22nd April, 2004 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 408/2002 passed by learned Sessions Judge, New Delhi in the case of FIR No. 297/95 under Sections 279/304-A of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC').2. The facts as they appear from the judgment of Ms. Mamta Sehgal, Additional Sessions Judge is that the bus bearing No.DL-1P-2979 on 15.8.1995 at around9.00 p.m., plying on route No. 521 came at fast speed and took a sharp turn at Shivaji Stadium and hit the pedestrian on account of which he fell down and when the injured was brought to the hospital he was declared brought dead. The driver of the bus ran away from the spot fearing apprehension of assault by the members of the public. A notice under Section 133 of the Motor Vehicle Act was served upon the owner of the vehicle on which the name of the accused/petitioner- Narender Singh- was given by the owner. A ...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Patliputra Construction
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ARBLR271(Delhi); 2005(80)DRJ69
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. Challenge is to the award dated 1.1.2002 published by Sh. J.L. Dhingra, Sole Arbitrator appointed to decide the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent arising out of the contract being W.O No. D/EE(XXVI)/91-92 W/O/33 dated 20.12.91.2. Respondent was the claimant before the Arbitrator and petitioner MCD was the respondent before the Arbitrator.3. Claim No. 1, 2 and 3 of the claimant have been allowed in full or in part. Claim No. 4 & 5 have been rejected. Claim No. 6 for pre suit, pendente lite and future interest has been allowed @ 12% per annum on the awarded sum. Claim No. 7 for cost has been rejected.4. MCD had 3 counter claims, all of which have been rejected.5. Claimant has not challenged the award. MCD has filed objections to the award. 6. It is stated in the objections that the learned Arbitrator has ignored the written statement and counter claim filed by the MCD. Award is challenged that sufficient reasons have not been stated by the Arbitrat...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Mahipal Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-2005
Reported in: 2005(80)DRJ754; (2005)140PLR23
Mukul Mudgal J.1. This writ petition challenges the order dated 29th September, 1995 directing reinstatement of the respondent workman with continuity of service with full back wages. The petitioner did file the written statement but yet did not lead any evidence inspire of several opportunities granted by the Labour Court. Accordingly, the evidence of the petitioner who was the respondent before the Labour Court, was closed. Even when the case was argued before the Labour Court, no one appeared on behalf of the Management to urge the case even though the evidence had been closed.2. The respondent/workman in his statement of claim averred that he has performed the duty from 19th May, 1986 to 21st September, 1987 and it is evident that the workman worked for more than 240 days. It is also not in dispute that no terminal benefits were tendered to the workman as postulated by Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. This is also the finding of the Labour Court.3. The petitioner having ...
Jogender Sharma Vs. Delhi Administration and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-2005
Reported in: 116(2005)DLT685; 2005(80)DRJ756
Vikramajit Sen, J.1. The petitioner is working as a Laboratory Assistant in Ramjas School, Anand Parvat, New Delhi. This School is unaided. It had published an advertisement on 16.03.2004 inviting 'Application to the post of TGT (Mathematics)' specifying therein the requisite qualification to be M.A.(Maths)/B.A. Hons.(Maths), B.Ed. The Petitioner does not possess this qualification and his aspiration to this post is predictably being canvassed on the lower/minimum qualification laid down by the Directorate. The petitioner has filed, as Annexure P/2, 'Promotion of Assistant Teachers/Laboratory Assistant working in the Directorate of Education to the post of TGT/LT', but the Annexure itself indicates that these Rules are with reference to persons working in Government Schools only. This is also the submission of learned counsel for the contesting Respondent/Ramjas School. The Directorate of Education, however, supports the Petitioner although the effect of the higher qualifications is li...
indira Uppal Vs. J.N. Uppal and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-2005
Reported in: 118(2005)DLT41
H.R. Malhotra, J.1. This is an application made by the Decree-holder Ms. Indira Uppal under the provisions of Section 24, CPC read with Order 21 Rule 18, CPC seeking transfer of another execution case 12/2004 currently pending before the Court of Sh. R.P. Pandey, ADJ so that execution application No. 102/ 2002 presently pending before this Court can be heard with execution application 12/2004, these two execution applications having arisen out of the award dated 25.11.2001. It is urged by the Counsel for the appellant/DH that earlier both the execution applications were pending before this Court but because of enhancement of pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Courts, the execution application No. 12/2004 was transferred to the District Judge in November, 2003.2. It is contended by the Decree-holder that since the Decree-holder is JD No. 1 in execution No. 12/2004 and the dates of awards in both the matters were 25th November, 2001 and that since parties in both the cases are same e...
Abdul Khalid Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-2005
Reported in: 2005(183)ELT348(Del)
Manju Goel, J.1. The revision-petitioner was convicted for an offence under Section 132/135(1)(a) of the Customs Act. Thereafter, he was sentenced to six months of rigorous imprisonment coupled with fine of Rs. 1000/- for the offence under Section 132 of the Customs Act and to imprisonment for one year coupled with fine of Rs. 1000/- for the offence under Section 135(1)(a) of the Customs Act. The brief facts of the case is as follows : Petitioner arrived at the I.G.I. Airport, New Delhi on 27th December, 1988 and when intercepted at the exit gate of the Customs arrival hall and questioned if he was carrying any gold or other contraband, he replied in the negative. But when the polythene bag which he was carrying was opened in presence of witnesses, some high density metal was found in a vacuum jar. On examination, one rectangular metallic sheet quoted with white metal was found. A licensed certified goldsmith was called at the spot who certified that the recovered metal sheet was gold ...
Nehru JaIn Vs. State Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2005
Reported in: 116(2005)DLT634; 2005(79)DRJ329
T.S. Thakur, J.1. Leasurily moving marriage processions led by a band playing popular Hindi film tunes and a group of revelers dancing to such tunes is a common sight in this part of the country. To add gaiety to the occasion, some such processions add fireworks while some others would make public display of their affluence by freely throwing about currency notes or small change for the urchins to collect and make merry. The incident with which we are concerned in this appeal and which led to the death of a band man took place in the course of one such marriage procession. What distinguished this procession from others was the presence of the appellant among the marriage party with a licensed revolver from which he was firing shots. One of the bullets shot from the revolver is alleged to have hit the deceased Vikram, one of the members of the band party resulting in his death and a charge-sheet against the appellant for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the I...
Sharafat Sheikh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2005
Reported in: 116(2005)DLT656; 2005(79)DRJ340
Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. In this writ petition filed by the petitioner for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the order of detention dated 11th June, 2004 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, the respondent No. 3 under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 as also the order of approval dated 18th June, 2004 communicated by the Deputy Secretary (Home) and has also prayed for setting the petitioner at liberty forthwith.2. The Commissioner of Police, Delhi, passed an order of detention against the petitioner on 11th June, 2004 on being satisfied that it is necessary to make an order directing that the petitioner should be detained with a view to prevent the petitioner from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The said order of detention was passed by the Commissioner of Police in the purported exercise of power conferred on him under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the National Se...
Sanjiv Vs. State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2005
Reported in: 2005(79)DRJ556
J.P. Singh, J.1. These two Criminal Appeals bearing Nos. 400/2000 titled 'Sanjiv v. State' and 713/2002 titled 'Sanjay v. State', have been preferred against the judgment and order on sentence dated 9.4.2002, convicting both the appellants under Section 302/34 IPC and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo RI for three months each.2. Briefly the facts of the case are that on 20.2.1999 at 12.27 P.M. Ct. Prabha gave information from PCR to the Wireless Operator, regarding a dead body lying in a factory in house No. 125, near village Kirari, Delhi, which information was conveyed to the Police Station on intercom and was recorded as DD No. 46-B. Copy of the DD was entrusted to SI C.L. Meena, who along with Ct. Umesh left for the spot. The factory comprised three rooms and a veranda. In the Eastern corner room dead body of a young male was lying. On enquiry the dead body was found to be of Roshan La...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »