Delhi Court May 2010 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2010 Page 2 of about 157 results (0.022 seconds)international Finance Corporation Vs. Bihar Sponge and Iron Ltd. and o ...
Court: Delhi
Valmiki J. Mehta, J.1. These writ petitions have been filed by the two secured creditors who had given foreign currency loan (FCL) to the sick company M/s. Bihar Sponge & Iron Ltd. (BSIL) impugning the order dated 21.6.2007 passed by the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (AAIFR) which upheld the order dated 29.7.2004 passed by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR). Since the issues involved in both the cases are same, both the writ petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. BSIL became a sick company though it had achieved 100% production because of the devaluation of rupee against the Deutsche Mark (DM) whereby the company's liability rose from Rs. 28.6 crores to Rs. 73.67 crores. On 19.12.1996, BSIL was declared a sick industrial company and IFCI was appointed as an Operating Agency(OA) to formulate the scheme for revival of the company. After various proposals were discussed including circulation of an earlier Draf...
Tag this Judgment!Abhishek Sharma Vs. State
Court: Delhi
A.K. Sikri, J.1. Having been convicted for the murder of Mandeep Kaur (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') and given life imprisonment for the said offence under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi vide his judgment dated 30th April, 2009, the appellant has come up to this Court and assails the aforesaid judgment and sentence by means of the present appeal.2. The appellant and the deceased were colleagues and were working in M/s Sai Telecom, B-304, Ground Floor, Saraswati Vihar, Delhi. The appellant was Customer Care Executive whereas, the designation of the deceased was Team Leader/Operations Manager. Their working hours in the office were 3.30 p.m. to 12.00 mid night. On the fateful night i.e. in the intervening night of 20th - 21st September, 2007 the deceased was found in flames near Queen Marry School, Model Town. PCR Van rushed her to LNJP Hospital and thereafter shifted to Maharaja Agarsen Hospital. However, she could not survi...
Tag this Judgment!Hukum Devi and ors. Vs. Chander Bhan and ors.
Court: Delhi
Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. By this judgment, I shall dispose of above four appeals.2. Succinctly stated the facts relevant for the purpose of deciding these appeals are that on 2nd February, 1984 Mr. Chander Bhan was driving a taxi, number DLT 6201 with four passengers in it, in a reckless and negligent manner and he banged his taxi against rear portion of a statutory truck parked at Palam Road near Higher Secondary School. As a result of this accident Dilsukh Saini, one of the passengers in the taxi, died while Suraj Mal Saini and Prem Singh, other two passengers sustained grievous injuries. Three claim petitions were filed, one by Lrs of deceased and two by the injured passengers. The learned Tribunal came to conclusion that the accident took place due to composite negligence of taxi driver and the truck driver since the truck was parked on the road without its backlights on, and there was no attendant along the truck and the taxi was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by it...
Tag this Judgment!Shishir Kumar @ Chunnu Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.1. We have perused the impugned decision which is most inchoate and verbose; not only the counsel for the appellant but even the counsel for the State agree that they cannot make any head or tail out of the impugned decision. The contours of the conspiracy set forth have been penned by the learned trial judge in para 2 of the decision which we find is not only prolix but rolled all over. A sentence spanning nearly two pages has been written. So complex is the wording of para 2, that even the learned Trial Judge has not understood CRL.A.No. 566-2010 Page 1 of 6 what he was supposed to focus upon.2. As we understand and as stated by the learned Counsel for the parties, the case of the prosecution was that Kishan Kumar (P.O.) entered into a conspiracy with co-accused Shambhu Nath and Shishir Kumar to extract money from Ram Sanjeevan and in furtherance thereof Shishir Kumar lured away Prateek S/o Ram Sanjeevan and made a ransom call. Rs. 30 Lacs were demanded. Ram Sanj...
Tag this Judgment!Houghton MifflIn Company Vs. Rajinder Kumar Arya C+
Court: Delhi
S. Ravindra Bhat, J.1. The plaintiff sues the defendant for permanent injunction and other consequential reliefs, complaining copyright infringement.2. The suit averments are that the plaintiff is the copyright proprietor of several publications in respect of books. It is contended that the plaintiff has been in the publication business since 1908 as a successor to several firms that were originally formed in 1880. It submits that its worldwide sales are to the tune of US $ 1 billion. It is contended in the suit that the plaintiff's publications are known the world-over, particularly its educational and text books on specialized subjects, such as Economics, Chemistry etc. According to the plaintiff, it makes available several popular editions in Indian markets; some prominent titles among those are listed in para 5 of the suit. According to the averments, Special editions are priced differently and adapted to cater to Indian markets. The suit contends that the plaintiff granted time-bo...
Tag this Judgment!Sh. Satish Kumar Kukreja Vs. Additional Secretary (He), Ministry of Hr ...
Court: Delhi
Anil Kumar, J.1. The point for determination in the present writ petition is 'whether a retired employee of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) could be appointed as an enquiry officer in a disciplinary enquiry' under Rule 14 of Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965 [hereinafter referred to CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965] which was initiated against the petitioner who was an Assistant Commissioner in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) Regional Office, Lucknow.2. Sh. Indre Singh, a retired Commissioner of Departmental Enquiries of the Central Vigilance Commission was appointed by the Vice Chairman of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) on 17th June, 2008 as an enquiry officer in the Disciplinary proceedings, which were initiated against the petitioner. The petitioner had challenged the appointment of a retired officer as enquiry officer in the Original Application filed by the petitioner being O.A. No. 1699 of 2008. On account of conflicting views of various Benches...
Tag this Judgment!Hansa Devi and ors. Vs. Parashar Parsad and ors.
Court: Delhi
Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.1. By this judgment I shall decide above two appeals. Both the appeals have been preferred against the same award dated 18th September, 1992; one by the insurance company and other by the claimants. While claimants have claimed enhancement in the compensation, the insurance company has assailed the award on the ground that the learned Tribunal wrongly held that the liability of the insurance company was unlimited. There is no appeal by owner of the vehicle. The claim petition before the Tribunal was contested by the owner of the vehicle on the ground that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle. The insurance company in its written statement before the Tribunal had supported the owner on the issue of negligence but had taken a stand that liability of the insurance company was limited to Rs. 15,000/- only because the deceased in this case was a passenger and each passenger of bus was insured only for Rs. 15,000/-.2. Brief facts relevant f...
Tag this Judgment!Cellular Operators Association of India and ors. Vs. Mcd
Court: Delhi
ORDERSUBJECT: Permission for installation of Temporary Structures for Cellular Mobile Phone Services on Roof Top/Ground Level or various Premises Falling in the Area under Jurisdiction of Municipal Corporation of Delhi.In supersession of all earlier orders on the subject mentioned above, permission/License for installation of temporary structures on Roof-Tops/Ground level of various premises for Cellular/Basic Mobile Phone Services shall be accorded as per the policy approved by the Corporation vide Item No. U.B. No. 392 dated 16th March, 2010, earlier approved by the Standing Committee vide Resolution No. 722 dated 09.02.2010 and para 25 modified vide in anticipation approval from Chairman Standing Committee dated 29.03.2010 and Hon'ble Mayor (for Corporation) on dated 06.04.2010, subject to the following conditions:1. For installation of Base Station Antennas, clearances is required from Airports Authority of India, DUAC, Chief Fire Officer (DFS), ASI & DMRC (wherever applicable).2. ...
Tag this Judgment!Kangana Modi and ors. Vs. National Institute of Fashion Technology and ...
Court: Delhi
Kailash Gambhir, J.1. This common order shall dispose of a batch of five writ petitions bearing No. WP (C) Nos. 569/2010, 2264/20 10, 2267/2010, 2269/2010 and W.P.(C) No. 2270/2010, filed by the petitioners who are students of different courses in National Institute of Fashion Technology, New Delhi. All these petitions raise a common question as all these petitioners were detained from appearing in their respective semester examinations on account of shortfall of their attendance. Out of these five cases, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No 569/2010 and W.P.(C) No. 2264/20 10 seek relaxation in the shortfall of attendance on medical grounds. In W.P. (C) No. 2267/2010 and 2270/2010 the petitioners claim condonation of shortfall of attendance on account of reaching late in classes due to traffic congestion while in W.P. (C) No. 2269/20 10 the petitioner has claimed condonation on the ground that she could not attend classes due to the exigency of taking care of her mother who met with an accide...
Tag this Judgment!Hartraj Singh Vs. Godrej Agrovet Ltd and anr.
Court: Delhi
ORDERSanjiv Khanna, J.Crl. M.C. No. 50/2010 and Crl. M.A. No. 180/2010 (for stay)1. The petitioner Col. Hartaj Singh submits that the criminal courts in Delhi do not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain and decide the criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 filed by respondent No. 1, Godrej Agrovet Ltd. for dishonour of cheque of Rs. 15,48,639/-. Learned Counsel for the petitioner in this regard has relied upon Shri Ishar Alloy Steels Ltd. v. Jayaswals Neko Ltd. : (2001) 3 SCC 609, Harnam Electronics Pvt. Ltd. v. National Panasonic India Ltd. : (2009) 1 SCC 720 and a decision of this Court in Online IT Shoppe India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. v. State and Anr. Crl. M.C. No. 2695/2009 and Crl. M.A. No. 9081/2009. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is based in Ladakh and the bank from which the dishonoured cheque was issued is situated at Panchkula, Haryana.2. Respondent No. 1 in the reply to the petition has stated that...
Tag this Judgment!