Delhi Court October 2011 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.
i.T.P.O. and ors. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2011
1. Two complaints No.217/3 dated 23.4.2001 and No.190/3 dated 4.4.2002 filed by the Inspecting Officer (Labour) alleging violation of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act 1970 have resulted in cognizance being taken by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate and the accused being summoned to face trial. 2. The complaints have been filed under Section 22 read with Section 24 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act 1970 alleging that ITPO has not obtained registration for employing contract labour through contractor and yet in spite thereof contract labour is being employed. Thus, Section 7 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act 1970 is alleged to have been violated. It is further alleged that ITPO has failed to ensure disbursement of wages by the contractor and thus sub-Section (2) of Section 21 as also Rule 72 and 73 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Central Rules 1971 have been breached. 3. Section 7 of the Contract Labour (Regula...
Yunus Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2011
1. These two appeals are directed against impugned judgment dated 08.04.2009 and subsequent order on sentence date 20.04.2009 delivered by Additional Sessions Judge, North East District, Delhi in case No. 50/2006, FIR No. 191/2002, P.S. Vivek Vihar, whereby the appellants Sapna Talwar and Satyajeet were convicted under Section 302 IPC and were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life, they were also convicted under Section 365 IPC and were sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for five years and pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default of which to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Further, appellants Sapna Talwar and Satyajeet were also convicted under Section 201 IPC and were to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default of which to undergo simple imprisonment for one and a half months. Appellant Yunus was only convicted for an offence under Section 120 B IPC. In addition, Sapna Talwar and Satyajeet have also been sentenced under Sect...
State Vs. Ved Prakash Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2011
1. These six appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 18.03.2008 delivered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby the appellants Ravi Kant Sharma, Shri Bhagwan, Satya Prakash and Pradeep Sharma were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 120-B read with Section 302 IPC for hatching a criminal conspiracy to kill Shivani Bhatnagar (deceased), who was actually killed by Pradeep Sharma in execution of the said conspiracy. The other accused were Ved Prakash Sharma and Ved Prakash @ Kalu, who were acquitted of all charges. The State has preferred two appeals (Crl. A. 751/2009 & Crl. A. 752/2009) in respect of Ved Prakash Sharma and Ved Prakash @ Kalu against the said acquittals. The impugned judgment dated 18.03.2008 was delivered in Sessions Case No. 14/2006 and arose out of the FIR No. 21/1999 under Sections 302/201/403/404/411/ 419/392/397/120-B/34 IPC registered at Police Station Mandawali on 23.01.1999.2. All the convicted persons were,...
State Vs. Ved Prakash @ Kalu
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-12-2011
1. These six appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 18.03.2008 delivered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby the appellants Ravi Kant Sharma, Shri Bhagwan, Satya Prakash and Pradeep Sharma were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 120-B read with Section 302 IPC for hatching a criminal conspiracy to kill Shivani Bhatnagar (deceased), who was actually killed by Pradeep Sharma in execution of the said conspiracy. The other accused were Ved Prakash Sharma and Ved Prakash @ Kalu, who were acquitted of all charges. The State has preferred two appeals (Crl. A. 751/2009 & Crl. A. 752/2009) in respect of Ved Prakash Sharma and Ved Prakash @ Kalu against the said acquittals. The impugned judgment dated 18.03.2008 was delivered in Sessions Case No. 14/2006 and arose out of the FIR No. 21/1999 under Sections 302/201/403/404/411/ 419/392/397/120-B/34 IPC registered at Police Station Mandawali on 23.01.1999.2. All the convicted persons were,...
Mahabir Singh Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi, Through Its Chief Secretary, ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-2011
DR. RAMESH CHandRA PandA, MEMBER(A) 1. The Miscellaneous Applicant No.161/2011 has been moved on 10.01.2011 in OA No.2032/2010 by the respondents pursuant to the directions of the Tribunal on 15.11.2010 in the said OA and have sought three months extension of time to implement the orders. Paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 of the order are relevant which are re-produced below:- “5. The applicant is justified in clamouring for early decision of his case. As mentioned above, he is facing the enquiry since April, 2008. He has meanwhile superannuated and is getting only provisional pension. Some of his post-retiral dues may also have been withheld. In totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, we direct the respondents to complete the enquiry within a period of two months from today, which, if not completed, shall be deemed to have been abated. We are sanguine that the applicant would cooperate. However, if there be non-cooperation on the part of the applicant, it would be permissible ...
Gram Panchayat Totu (Majthai) and Others Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-2011
A.S. Naidu, J. Gram Panchayat Totu through Shri Uttam Singh Kashyap and two other villagers of the said Village, situated in District Shimla of Himachal Pradesh, have filed this appeal under Section 18(1) read with Section 14, 15 and 19 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, inter alia praying to restrain the Municipal Corporation, Shimla and Himachal Pradesh State Government from undertaking construction of the Solid Bio-Waste Management Plant at Village BHARYAL on TARA DEVI - TOTU BYE PASS about 9 kms away from Shimla Town and for other consequential reliefs. 2. To appreciate the issues in controversy, it would be prudent to state briefly the facts relevant for the said purpose. Way back in the year 1999, a Solid Bio-Waste Management Plant (hereinafter called as MSW, Plant) was installed by Shimla Municipality (hereinafter called M.C. Shimla) at a place commonly known as DARNI-KA-BAGICHA, Lalpass, Shimla. By afflux of time, the Township of Shimla grew all around the place consequ...
Mrs. Sushila Dabas Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
1. After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to raise the issue before the appropriate Forum in accordance with law and without prejudice to the contentions raised in the present writ petition. 2. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as prayed for. CM NOS. 16797-16800/2011 IN W.P.(C) No. 7409/2011 3. In view of the orders passed in the main petition, these applications do not survive and the same are disposed of. ...
Satya Bhushan JaIn Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
1. The appellant is aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 25-02-2009 delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, district North-West, Rohini courts, Delhi in Sessions Case No. 100/2008 arising out of FIR no.527/2002 registered at police station Shalimar Bagh under sections 302/328/394/415/120-B/34 of the Indian penal code. By virtue of the impugned judgement, the appellant Satya Bhushan Jain has been convicted of the offence punishable under section 302/394 IPC. The appellant is also aggrieved by the order on sentence dated 05- 03-2009 passed by the learned additional sessions judge whereby the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigourous imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 3000/-for the offence under section 302 IPC. In addition, the appellant has also been sentenced to undergo rigourous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 5000/- for the offence under section 394 IPC. In default of the payment of fine, the appellant is required to undergo simple imprisonment ...
Gupta and Gupta Chartered Accountants and Another Vs. Reserve Bank of ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
1. The Petitioner, a firm of chartered accountants, is aggrieved by a decision of Reserve Bank of India (‘RBI’), Respondent No. 1, communicated to Punjab National Bank (‘PNB’), Respondent No. 2, advising that the PNB may carry out the quarterly review for the quarter ending 30th June 2009 with the five existing statutory central auditors (‘SCAs’), excluding the Petitioner firm in view of the circumstances mentioned in the PNB’s letter dated 27th May 2009 addressed to the RBI. Background Facts 2. By a letter dated 6th October 2005 issued by the PNB, the Petitioner was appointed as a Joint SCA along with five other SCAs to carry out half yearly/quarterly review of accounts commencing from 30th September 2005 in terms of the RBI Circular of that date as well as for auditing the final accounts of the PNB for the year ending 2005-06. Admittedly, the Petitioner’s appointment was continued on a year to year basis and in terms of the then existin...
The Indian Express Limited Vs. Express Publications Madurai Limited an ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
1. Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Limited, which later came to be named as Indian Express Newspapers (Mumbai) Limited, founded by late Shri Ramnath Goenka, was publishing a number of newspapers, including its flagship newspaper "Indian Express". After death of Shri Ramnath Goenka on 05th October, 1991, there were numerous litigations amongst his heirs, including Shri Viveck Goenka, Manoj Kumar Sonthalia and Smt Saroj Goenka. A settlement dated 05th February, 1995 was reached between (a) group of Shri Viveck Goenka, (b) group of Shri Manoj Kumar Sonthalia and (c) group of Smt Saroj Goenka. A decree dated 16th April, 1997 was passed by Madras High Court in terms of the settlement. This settlement was modified by a supplementary agreement dated 12th August, 2005. Under clause 17 of the compromise decree, the plaintiff became the absolute owner of the registered titles of the newspapers and magazines which it was publishing and defendant No. 1 was not to use or adopt any of those title...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »