Delhi Court May 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.
M/S Prestolite of India Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union Bank of India and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. The present writ petition has been filed against a common order dated 04.08.2010 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as „Tribunal) in appeal nos. 86/2007 and 204/2007. Appeal No. 204/2007 has been filed by the Judgment Debtors (in short „JDs) while appeal no. 86/2007 has been filed by the Union Bank of India, the judgment creditor in the present case. 2. This is a second round before the Tribunal. We are, however, constrained to note that the disposal of the appeal has not been satisfactory. There are several aspects which the Tribunal has failed to elucidate upon. Findings have been returned without reference to the relevant documents. Before we elaborate upon same, we would like to note briefly the relevant facts which gave rise to the present proceedings. The writ petitioners before us, i.e., JDs have in their writ petition adverted to several events, which, according to us became irrelevant after the particular point in time in vie...
NizamuddIn and ors. Vs. State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 26.11.1997 and the order of sentence dated 28.11.1997 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Trial Court) whereby the three Appellants (Nizamuddin, Sirajuddin and Riazuddin) were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of ` 1,000/ each. In default of payment of fine they were further directed to undergo RI for two months each. 2. During the pendency of this appeal Appellant-Riazuddin died on 29.08.2010. His death certificate was filed; verification in respect of his death was made and proceedings against him were ordered to have abated by the order of this Court on 14.03.2011. 3. This case was registered on a statement Ex.PW7/A made by PW-7 Sahajuddin. It is alleged that the families of Appellant Nizamuddin and deceased Jafruddin were not having cordial relations. On 02.03.1995 at about 8:30 p.m. Sah...
The Management of Ashok Hotel Vs. Mohinder Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. The petitioner employer by this writ petition impugns the award dated 25th October, 2005 of the Industrial Adjudicator on the following reference: "Whether the punishment of stoppage of three annual increments with cumulative effect imposed on Sh.Mohinder Singh is illegal and / or unjustified and if so, to what relief is he entitled and what direction are necessary in this respect? 2. Though during the proceedings before the Industrial Adjudicator a preliminary issue was framed as to the legality and validity of the departmental enquiry held by the petitioner employer prior to meeting out the punishment to the respondent workman but the petitioner employer on 25th September, 2004 consented to the issue as to the legality and validity of the departmental enquiry being decided against it and opted to prove before the Industrial Adjudicator misconduct leading to punishment. 3. The petitioner employer examined two witnesses before the Industrial Adjudicator. One of them viz. Smt. G.R. R...
Kalyan Sharma Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. This Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23.08.1997 and the order on sentence dated 28.08.1997 whereby the Appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code (IPC) and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay the fine of `1,000/- or in default of payment of fine to undergo simple Imprisonment for three months. 2. Appellant Kalyan Sharma was employed as a security guard at Firdos Farm House (the farm), situated at Bijwasan Road, Najafgarh. On 20.04.1994 at about 5:40 P.M. Sarwan Singh (PW-1) and the Appellant were present at the main gate of the farm. The other security personnel working in the farm were also on duty. Appellant was holding a .315 bore rifle. 3. Lalit Gaili (the deceased) who was working as a Manager in the farm went to the main gate in his Maruti Car No. DL-ICC- 0533 after the office closed. Surender Pal and another Chowkidar at the farm opened the main gate. Lalit Gaili had a word with Sudershan Singh, S...
Sh. Sanjay Chiripal Vs. Registrar Co-operative Societies and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. The captioned writ petition is directed against the order dated 28.01.2011 passed by the Financial Commissioner in exercise of his revisionary powers under Section 116 of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'DCS Act'). By the impugned order the Financial Commissioner has repelled the challenge laid to the report of the Inquiry Officer (in short 'I.O.') dated 15.01.2008 submitted by one D.P. Dwivedi, while conducting proceedings under Section 62 of the DCS Act. 2. It is important to note that the upshot of the impugned order of the Financial Commissioner is that, the I.O. having put, the shortcomings and the deficiencies in the working of respondent no.2 (hereinafter referred to as the Society) (as recorded in the inspection report), to the society, he had the authority to seek explanation and record compliance of such defects, shortcomings and deficiencies. The case of misappropriation and mis-utilization of funds not being pressed by the complaina...
Pradeep Lal Vs. Union of India Thr. Joint Secretary, Ministry of Steel
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-10-2011
The petitioner vide letter dated August 05, 2008 was appointed to the post of Manager (Training & Capacity Building) on a project on "Energy Efficiency Improvement in Steel Rerolling Mill (SRRM) Sector". It was a condition of his employment that he shall remain on probation for a period of six months and that his confirmation will be subject to the satisfactory performance during the probation period. The details with regard to the project and the manner, in which the services of an employee in relation to that project can be terminated, are contained in "Project Operations Manual". It appears that the respondent did not find the performance of the petitioner up to the mark and hence, vide communication dated December 31, 2008, he was informed that, "your employment with us as Expert (Training & Capacity Building) is not confirmed and is discontinued with effect from 1st January, 2009." He was further informed that the job to which he was appointed "has been the most demanding ...
V. Mary Ajitha Vs. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. The respondent DSSSB had in the year 2009 advertised for various posts in the Government of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD). The petitioner claiming to be in the OBC category claims to have applied for the post of Staff Nurse (Female). It is the case of the petitioner that despite securing more marks than the last candidate in the OBC category, recommended for appointment to the said post, the petitioner has not been so selected. 2. A perusal of the advertisement at pages 16 & 24 of the paper book shows that the OBC candidates "seeking benefit of reservation were required to submit OBC certificate issued by the competent authority of the GNCTD" along with their application forms. The petitioner admittedly did not submit the OBC certificate issued by the competent authority of the GNCTD and on the contrary submitted an OBC certificate issued by the competent authority of Tamil Nadu. Though the petitioner claims to have now applied to the competent authority of the GNCTD for the said certif...
Vinod and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. Both the appeals are directed against the judgment dated 14.08.2002 passed in Sessions Case No.40/1999 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi, arising out of FIR No.1/99 registered at Police Station Delhi Cantt. wherein both the appellants have been convicted under Section 302/34 IPC and u/s 323/34 IPC for having committed the murder of one Sanjay and having caused simple hurt to Jagdish. The appeals are also directed against the order of sentence dated 2.9.2002, whereby both the appellants are directed to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- each and in default thereby to further undergo R.I for seven days. 2. Briefly the facts relevant for disposal of appeal are as under:- A case was registered against aforesaid two appellants and the co- accused, namely, Raj Kumar & Rajinder @ Chutki vide FIR No.1/1999 (Ex. PW15/1) in Police Station Delhi Cantt on the statement Ex. PW1/1 of complainant Jagdish (PW.1) wherein he had alleged that on 31st Dece...
K.S.Pundir Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. K.S.Pundir, the petitioner, lays a challenge to the order dated 14.9.1996 passed by the Disciplinary Authority levying penalty of removal from service on account of petitioner being unauthorizedly absent from duty for 259 days commencing from 30.12.1995 till 13.9.1996 i.e. the immediate day preceding when the penalty was levied. He also questions the order dated 15.9.1997 rejecting the appeal filed by him against the order dated 14.9.1996. 2. Relevant facts are that K.S.Pundir, a Sub-Inspector with Central Industrial Security Force, requested for 15 days earned leave, which was sanctioned from 15.12.1995 to 29.12.1995 with permission to avail 2 days journey time and add on 2 days CCL and thus he left the Unit at Uri (J&K) on 11.12.1995. He was to join back on 30.12.1995. He failed to do so. 3. It may be noted that he was posted at Obra before he was sent to Uri, which is in the State of Jammu & Kashmir, as extra force personnel were needed for security at Uri. He was to repo...
Mangal Ram Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-10-2011
1. The present appeal impugns a judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (hereafter called "the impugned judgment" and the "Trial Court" respectively), dated 20.02.1998, in the case arising from FIR 454/98, P.S. Dabri. By the impugned judgment, the Appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 302, IPC, and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. 2. The prosecution alleged that on 29.11.1992, at about 09:00 PM, one Niranjan ("the deceased"), living in the house of PW-4 and his wife (PW-2 Roopmati) was attacked with a knife. The knife blow, was given by Mangal, the Appellant. The deceased had asked the Appellant not to sit near the chabutra of the shop owned by PW-4, which was managed by PW-1 and PW-2, as it was causing inconvenince to the ladies who used to frequent it. The deceased, who was treated by PW-2 as her son, had asked the Appellant to go away, which angered him; he therefore attacked the deceased, which resulted in his death. PW-1 Shrimati, PW-2's ...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »