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.
Vijay Kumar @ Vijay and anr. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2011
1. These two appeals are directed against the judgment dated 27.03.2010 and order on sentence dated 30.03.2010 delivered by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi in Sessions Case No. 109/2009 whereby both the appellants were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each under Section 302 IPC and in case of default in payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months each. The appellants were further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- each under Section 380 IPC and in case of default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months each. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. On 16.2.2002 two dead bodies, which were later on identified as of Prem (Driver) and Sanjay (cleaner/helper), were found in an abandoned truck bearing No.HR-38-8021 at Lawrence Road, Delhi. During investigation, it was revealed that the said t...
Managing Committee, Frank Anthony Public School and Vs. C.S. Clarke an ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2011
1. These two writ petitions by the Managing Committee (`MC') of the Frank Anthony Public School (`School') and its Principal, Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 respectively, are directed against the common order dated 22nd June 2000, passed by the Delhi School Tribunal (`Tribunal') allowing the Appeal Nos. 36 and 37 of 1989 filed by Mr. and Mrs. C.S. Clarke respectively holding their dismissal by the School by orders dated 30th July 1989 to be illegal and against the principles of natural justice. While Mr. C.S. Clarke [Respondent No. 1 in W.P. (C) No. 1672 of 2001] was held to be entitled to reinstatement with all consequential benefits, the legal representatives of Mrs. C.S. Clarke [Respondent No. 1 in W.P. (C) No. 1666 of 2001], who expired during the pendency of her appeal in the Tribunal, were held to be entitled to the consequential benefits.2. While directing notice to issue in the writ petitions on 11th April 2001, this Court recorded the statement of the learned counsel for Respondent N...
Devki Nandan Malhotra and ors. Vs. Rajendra Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2011
1. By this common order, it is proposed to decide both the aforesaid appeals which have arisen from the same motor accident and the claims in respect of which have been decided by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal by its common judgment and award dated 07.09.2002.2. Concisely, the facts of the case are that on the night of 13.01.1997, at around 9:50 p.m., one Harish Chander Malhotra and his wife Smt. Kanta Malhotra were going on a two-wheeler scooter bearing No.DL-58B-2579 from Jitar Nagar to Noida, when they met with a motor vehicular accident, caused by the rash and negligent driving of the truck bearing No.AP-094-6898, in which both Harish Chander Malhotra and his wife received fatal injuries and were declared dead when taken to the hospital. Separate Claim Petitions were filed by the legal representatives of both the deceased, one being Suit No.703/97 (New No.597/01), filed by the legal representatives of deceased Harish Chander Malhotra, namely, Devki Nandan Malhotra (father), J...
Shahnawaz Vs. State N.C.T. of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2011
1. By the present appeals, the Appellants lay a challenge to the judgment dated 21st August, 2001 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge convicting the Appellants for offences punishable under Sections 452/395/397/34 IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act and order on sentence dated 21st August, 2011 whereby Appellants were sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 3 years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one month for offences punishable under Section 452 IPC., Rigorous Imprisonment of 7 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of one month under Section 397 IPC. Appellant Salim was also sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs, 500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of 15 days for offence punishable under Section 27 Arms Act.2. Briefly the prosecution case is that on 8th July, 1999 at ab...
Shambhu Dayal Sharma Vs. Mcd and ors.Q
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2011
1. The petition as originally filed claiming the relief of quashing the election held on 20th April, 2011 of the respondent no.4 Ms. Rajni Abbi to the post of Mayor, Delhi Municipal Corporation was found to be incomplete and inadequate and permission granted to amend the petition. Though a proposed amended petition was filed but opportunity to further amend the petition was sought and was also granted. Proposed amended petition dated 1st June, 2011 has been filed. However since the notice of the petition had not been issued, though the counsels for the respondent no.1 MCD, respondent no.2 UOI and respondent no.4 Ms. Rajni Abbi were appearing on advance notice and were opposing even the amendments sought, and finding the controversy entailed to be purely legal, with consent, the counsels were finally heard on the averments in the last proposed amended petition dated 1st June, 2011.2. The petitioner claims to be one of the Councillors of MCD. It is his case, that the respondent no.4 is g...
Salim @ Allahdiya Vs. State (G.N.C.T.) of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2011
1. By the present appeals, the Appellants lay a challenge to the judgment dated 21st August, 2001 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge convicting the Appellants for offences punishable under Sections 452/395/397/34 IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act and order on sentence dated 21st August, 2011 whereby Appellants were sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 3 years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one month for offences punishable under Section 452 IPC., Rigorous Imprisonment of 7 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of one month under Section 397 IPC. Appellant Salim was also sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs, 500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of 15 days for offence punishable under Section 27 Arms Act.2. Briefly the prosecution case is that on 8th July, 1999 at ab...
Rajender Kumar Vs. the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2011
1. These three appeals are filed against the judgment dated 3rd July, 2010 passed in Session's case no.112/06 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge North District, Delhi, arising out of FIR No.83/06 P.S. Ashok Vihar u/s 363-364-A/302 IPC wherein all the three appellants have been convicted u/s 364-A/302/34 IPC. The appeals are also directed against the order of sentence dated 24th July, 2010 wherein all the three appellants have been sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each u/s 364-A IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for one month. They are further sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each u/s 302/34 IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for one month. It is also ordered that both the sentences shall run consecutively.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 05.02.2006 the complainant Avdesh lodged FIR No.83/06 Ex.PW5/A in police station Ashok Vihar about his son Anuj @ Golu, aged about 10 years, ...
In the Matter of M/S. Reckitt Benckiser (India) Lt Vs. --
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2011
1. Present petition has been filed under Sections 100 to 105 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short 'Act') read with Rule 46 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 (for short 'Rules, 1959) for confirming the reduction of share capital of the petitioner-company. 2. The relevant facts of the present case are that on 5 th July, 1951, the petitioner-company was incorporated as a public limited company under the name of M/s. Reckitt & Colman of India Limited. On 18th December, 2000, the name of the petitioner-company was changed to M/s. Reckitt Benckiser (India) Limited.3. Between 14th February, 2003 and 19th May, 2005, the equity shares of petitioner-company were delisted from Bombay, Calcutta and National Stock Exchanges in accordance with Regulation 21(3)(a) of Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers Regulations, 1997. In fact, in view of the directions received from the said Stock Exchanges, M/s. Reckitt Benckiser Plc's subsidiary company, namely, Lancaster Squar...
Vijay Kumar @ Vijay Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2011
1. These two appeals are directed against the judgment dated 27.03.2010 and order on sentence dated 30.03.2010 delivered by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi in Sessions Case No. 109/2009 whereby both the appellants were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each under Section 302 IPC and in case of default in payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months each. The appellants were further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- each under Section 380 IPC and in case of default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months each. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. On 16.2.2002 two dead bodies, which were later on identified as of Prem (Driver) and Sanjay (cleaner/helper), were found in an abandoned truck bearing No.HR-38-8021 at Lawrence Road, Delhi. During investigation, it was revealed that the said t...
Anuj Sharma and ors. Vs. University of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-03-2011
1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek directions to direct the respondent to convert the OBC category seats to the after general category which have remained unfilled 31.8.2011.2. petitioners Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the submits that 50 seats of the OBC category are still lying vacant which were never converted to the general category by the respondent University after filling the seats in the OBC category as directed by the Apex Court in P.V. Indiresan v. Union of India, Civil Appeal No. 7084/2011 decided on 18.8.2011. Counsel submits that there is a clear defiance on the part of the respondent University of the directions given by the Apex Court in the matter of P.V. Indiresan (Supra), as in terms of the said judgment the respondents were legally bound to convert the vacant OBC category seats into the general category seats. Counsel also submits that present petition candidate category. who the rank of some of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »