Delhi Court April 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.
Raju @ Kundan. Vs. State of Delhi.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2011
1. The appellant (hereafter called "Raju") impugns a judgment and order dated 24.05.2010 in S.C. No. 1107/2009 whereby he was convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and Section 25, 27, 54, 59 of the Arms Act. For the offence under Section 302 IPC, the appellant was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs. 2 lakhs) to be paid to the family of the deceased, in default of payment of fine the convict would further undergo Simple Imprisonment for 2 years. For the offence under Section 25 of Arms Act, the appellant was sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for 3 years with fine of Rs.2,000/- in default of which he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for one month. The appellant is also sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for 5 years with fine of Rs. 2,000/- for the offence under Section 27 of Arms Act, in default of which he shall under Simple Imprisonment for one month.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 21.11.2006, at about 7:30...
Rajesh @ Rakesh. Vs. State of Delhi.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2011
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order on sentence dated 05.07.1997 and 07.07.1997, respectively, passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdara, Delhi, in case No. 21/96, FIR No. 39/84 P.S. Seelampur, Delhi whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The appellant was also convicted under Section 323 read with Section 34 IPC and ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorouimprisonment for one month and was also convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.2. If we synchronize the prosecution evidence and the story, the following chronol...
Sh. Jagmohan Nath Kapoor. Vs. Sh. Manmohan Nath Kapoor.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2011
1. This is an application filed by the plaintiff under Sections 2 and 3 of the Partition Act seeking to purchase the share of the defendant in the suit property for a consideration of Rs. 2 crores.2. Vide order dated 21st January, 2011, this court passed a preliminary decree for partition of the suit property i.e. property no. F-11, Lajpat Nagar-III, New Delhi admeasuring 200 square yards and comprising of ground floor, first floor and second floor. The plaintiff has one half share in the suit property whereas the remaining half share is owned by the defendant. Shri Jayant K. Mehta, Advocate was appointed as local commissioner to suggest ways and means by which the partition could be effected. The local commissioner could also take the assistance of an architect if found necessary in the circumstances of the case.3. The local commissioner has accordingly submitted his report dated 26th April, 2010. The local commissioner also availed the services of an architect Mr. Siddharth Chaturved...
Vijay Jain, and ors. Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2011
1. The common challenge in all these petitions is to a Circular dated 10th July 2008 issued by the Commissioner of Industries ('COI') fixing the rates of conversion of industrial plots in Narela Industrial Area from leasehold to freehold at Rs. 19,800/- per sq. m. for the year 2007-08. The further prayer of the Petitioners is that a direction should be issued to the COI to process the pending applications of the Petitioners for conversion @ Rs. 7, 500/- per sq. m. or in the alternative to charge Rs. 9,900/- per sq. m. as per the circular of the DDA @ for the year 2007- 08. The third prayer is for a direction to the Respondents not to charge composition charges on account of non-execution of lease deeds and delayed construction in terms of the decision taken in the meetings dated 6th July 2006 and 22nd August 2007 of the Committee constituted for the purpose, comprising of the representatives of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi ('GNCTD') (Respondent No. 1), the COI ...
Areva Tandd. Vs. the Asst. Director of Income Tax, and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2011
1. Keeping in view the similitude of the question involved in this batch of writ petitions, they were heard together and are disposed of by a common order. For the sake of clarity and convenience, the facts of WP(C) 12859/2009 are enumerated herein.2. The petitioner company was awarded four contracts encompassing Onshore supply, Onshore services and Offshore supply, one each for Northern and North Eastern regions and two for Eastern region by Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. (PGCIL). The contracts were awarded on 29.1.1998, 15.5.2000, 16.1.2001 and 20.1.2002. The contracts for Onshore supply and Onshore services were given on sub contract to Areva T&D; Systems India Ltd. at the same price at which the said contracts were awarded to the petitioner by PGCIL.3. The PGCIL had moved an application under Section 195(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for brevity the Act') with regard to the payments to be made to the petitioners. The revenue, vide orders dated 6.6.2000, 23.5.2001 and 28.12....
K.K. SaksenA. Vs. International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-25-2011
1. In this intra-Court appeal which is preferred against the order dated 17.1.2006 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No.1846/2006, the seminal issue whether the respondent International Commission of Irrigation and Drainage (hereinafter referred to as ICID) is a State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India and further if the said organization is not treated as a State and other authority its actions will be amenable for judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the foundation that it performs public duty, emerges for consideration.2. The facts which are requisite to be stated are that the appellant was appointed on 20.1.1997 as Secretary, ICID. On 8.1.1999, a letter was issued by the Secretary General relating to the role and responsibility in respect of the post. Thereafter, on 11.8.1999, the Secretary General sent a fax message from Stockholm directing him to look after day to day work during his absence for the conference at Granada and shortly...
Sh Mohan Lal WaliA. Vs. State (C. B.i) Delhi.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2011
1. The captioned appeal has been preferred under the provisions of Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) against the judgment and order of sentence dated 11.02.2003 and 13.02.2003 respectively passed in CC No. 26/97 RC No. 72(A)/96/C.B.I./ACB/New Delhi by the Special Judge, Tis Hazari Delhi.2. By virtue of the impugned judgment, the appellant has been found guilty under the provisions of Section 7, Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the P C Act).3. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is as follows:4. On 21.09.1996 at about 1200 hrs one Sh Purshottam Singh (PW6) made a complaint (Ex PW6/A) dated 21.09.1996 to the Superintendent of Police, Anti Corruption Branch (in short ACB), CBI, New Delhi about, a bribe, in the sum of Rs 2000/- having been demanded by the appellant. The complainant (PW6) alleged that the cause for seeking a bribe from him was his involvemen...
Suresh Chand Joshi. Vs. Cbi.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2011
1. The present appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) is directed against the judgment dated 07.01.2003 passed by Shri M.L. Sahni, Special Judge, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi in CC No.136/1999.2. By virtue of the impugned judgment, the appellant has been convicted for offences under Section 7 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the P.C. Act). In respect of offences under section 7 of the P.C. Act, the appellant has been sentenced to simple imprisonment for a period of two years and a fine of Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the appellant is required to undergo a further period of incarceration (i.e., simple imprisonment) for a further period of two months. In so far as the appellants conviction under section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the P.C Act is concerned, he has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of thr...
Jagpal Singh. Vs. Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2011
1. The petition impugns the direct theft assessment bills in the sum of `1,61,876/- and `2,09,903/- raised by the respondent on the petitioner. This Court while issuing notice of the petition, vide order dated 25 th April, 2007 permitted the petitioner to pay the amount of the two bills in two equal monthly installments payable on 30th May, 2007 and 30th June, 2007 and subject to the said payment, restrained disconnection of electricity supply. The petitioner preferred an intra court appeal against the said order but withdrew the same and again approached this Bench for making payment of the amount of the bills in three installments. Vide order dated 30 th May, 2007 the petitioner was directed to make payment of the first installment of `1,50,000/- on 15th June, 2007, the second installment of `1,50,000/- on 15th July, 2007 and the balance amount on or before 15 th August, 2007. Pleadings have been completed and the counsels have been heard.2. It is one of the contentions of the petiti...
The M.P. State Mining Corporation Ltd. Vs. Sanjeev Bhaskar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Apr-21-2011
1. A mining lease was granted on 03.11.1966 to late Shri R.N. Bhaskar, father of respondent No. 1 herein, in respect of an area of 28 acres (11.331 hectares) for Pyrophyllite and Diaspore minerals in Village Kari, Distt. Tikamgarh, Madhya Pradesh for a period of 20 years from 03.11.1966 to 02.11.1986. A show-cause notice was issued to the lessee alleging violation of two conditions of the mining lease on 18.09.1979, which was replied to by the lessee on 03.10.1979. The State of Madhya Pradesh (i.e., appellant in LPA No. 284/2011) not being satisfied, determined the lease on 05.04.1980.2. The lessee assailed this order by filing a revision application before the Central Govt., Ministry of Mines, but the same was also dismissed on 06.04.1981. The determination of the lease was, thus, assailed in a writ petition filed before the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Misc. Petition No. 805/1981. It may be noticed that during the pendency of this petition, the original lessee died leaving behind his...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »