Delhi Court June 2011 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
Indian National Shipowners' Association Vs. National Union of Seafarer ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-24-2011
1. This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the Ship Owners' Association on the apprehension of impending strike/agitation in some form on the ships, ports, offices and residences of petitioner and its member shipping companies, primarily, on account of the show of strength between the rival unions - respondent Nos.1 and 2 on the issue of participating in negotiations with regard to wage agreement. It is stated that the respondent No.1 Union claims to be and has been found to be having the largest number of membership by the Regional Labour Commissioner. For that reason, it was objecting to inclusion of more than three members from the respondent No.2 Union as team of members for negotiations. Whereas, the respondent No.2 Union wanted more than three members of their union to form part of the team for negotiations. According to the petitioners, inspite of best efforts, the petitioners were unable to resolve the deadlock between the stand so ta...
Dinesh Vitthal Patil and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-22-2011
1. Heard rival submissions on earlier dates. Perused the documents annexed to the Writ Petition. Also perused the contents of the affidavit filed by Police Inspector & Special Executive Magistrate, Nashik (Rural) dated 6th January, 2011. Earlier, after issue of Rule on 18th January, 2011 by this Bench, the further proceedings pending before the Special Executive Magistrate, Nashik (Rural), were stayed and Writ Petition was posted for final hearing. 2. The Petitioners are challenging the notices issued to them under Sections 110(e)(g) & 111 of Criminal Procedure Code. Both the notices were issued on 6th September, 2010. Copies of said notices, which are in vernacular Marathi, are attached to the present Writ Petition at Page Nos.10 & 12. 3. Rather under peculiar circumstances recourse to the writ jurisdiction was taken shelter of by the Petitioners for challenging the show-cause notices issued under the chapter proceedings, by contending that the Petitioners are social worke...
S.K. Srivastava Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-15-2011
1. The petition seeks setting aside / quashing of the recommendations of the empowered Committee of Secretaries for appointment to the post of Member, CBDT qua respondent no.4 Sh. S.S. Rana (IRS 75014) and respondent no.6 Ms. Sudha Sharma (IRS 76007). The petition also seeks setting aside and quashing of the Vigilance Clearance issued to the said Sh. S.S. Rana and Ms. Sudha Sharma, on the ground of the same being patently illegal. 2. The petitioner has pleaded: (i) That the petitioner himself is an IRS officer; (ii) That the respondent No.4 Sh. S.S. Rana had between the years 1988-1990 conducted search and seizure operations in the premises and business of Sitani Group and detected and seized documents and other evidences of large scale tax evasion and money laundering; (iii) That Sh. S.S. Rana however handed over the appraisal report and seized material to the petitioner who was the Assessing Officer, only on 23rd March, 1992 when the limitation for passing assessment orders was to ex...
Dr. Muveen Kumar Vs. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University and ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-15-2011
1. The challenge is to the judgment dated 3rd June, 2011 of the Ld. Single Judge dismissing W.P.(C)2508/2011 preferred by the petitioner along with W.P.(C)2796/2011 preferred by one Dr. Nidhi Ahuja and which petition entailed similar controversy as in the petition preferred by the appellant herein. 2. The challenge by the appellant in the writ petition preferred by him was to the refusal of the respondent no.1 University to grant admission to the petitioner in the Post Graduate Degree Courses in the field of Medicine in the Academic Year 2011-2012 inspite of the appellant securing 28th rank in the Entrance Test held and thus being eligible for admission, for the reason of the appellant having withdrawn from admission secured by him to the Post Graduation Degree course in the field of ENT in the respondent no.1 University in the previous Academic Year 2010-2011. 3. The Ld. Single Judge in the judgment impugned in this appeal held- A. On analysis of the terms, clauses and conditions, co...
Ravinder Kumar JaIn Vs. Punjab National Bank
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-12-2011
1. The writ petition impugns the report dated 23 rd September, 2008 submitted by the Inquiry Officer appointed by the Disciplinary Authority of the respondent Bank to the said Disciplinary Authority. 2. On enquiry it is informed that the Disciplinary Authority has not taken any action on the said inquiry report as yet. 3. It has been inquired from the counsel for the petitioner as to how the writ petition is maintainable at this stage. This Court is of the opinion that challenge cannot ordinarily be permitted at successive stages of a transaction, inasmuch as if the same is permitted, the same would be the impediment in completion of the transaction. The disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner would culminate in the order of the Disciplinary Authority and the challenge if any required has to be made to the order of the Disciplinary Authority only and not at each and every stage of the disciplinary proceedings. 4. The senior counsel for the respondent Bank appearing on...
O.P. Kapoor and ors. Vs. Raman Kapoor and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-08-2011
1. O.M.P. No.245/2005 is a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (the Act) to assail the interim award dated 01.06.2005 passed by Justice P.K. Bahri (Retd.) in Arbitration Case Nos.157-160/1999 in relation to the claims raised by the respondent Sh. Raman Kapoor. The same has been preferred by Sh. O.P. Kapoor, the father of the respondent/claimant, and his three sons. 2. O.M.P. No.351/2009 is a petition under Section 34 of the Act to assail the final award dated 23.04.2009 passed by Justice P.K. Bahri (Retd.) in continuation of the aforesaid interim award. This petition too, has been preferred by Sh. O.P. Kapoor and his three other sons. 3. O.M.P. No.400/2009 is a petition under Section 34 of the Act preferred by Sh. Raman Kapoor/claimant before the Arbitral Tribunal, wherein he seeks modification of the final award dated 23.04.2009 to a limited extent. 4. O.M.P. Nos.428/2009 and 429/2009 are two petitions preferred by Sh. Raman Kapoor seeking interim measure...
Sharad Kumar and anr. Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-08-2011
1. Accused Ms. Kanimozhi Karunanithi and Sharad Kumar vide above referred applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are seeking bail in case FIR No.RC-DAI-2009-A-0045 P.S. ACB, CBI New Delhi. 2. Briefly stated, facts relevant for the above bail applications are that on 21.10.2009, the Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti Corruption Branch, New Delhi registered a case No.RC DAI-2009-A- 0045 on the allegations of criminal conspiracy and criminal misconduct against unknown officials of Department of Telecommunications, Govt. of India, unknown private persons/companies and others under Section 120-B IPC, 13(2) read with 13(a)(d) of P.C. Act, in respect of allotment of Letters of Intent, Unified Access Services (UAS) Licences and 2G spectrum by the Department of Telecommunications. 3. First charge sheet was filed on 02.04.2011 in the court of Special Judge, Patiala House, New Delhi against 12 accused persons including M/s. Swan Telecom Pvt. Ltd. and its directors Shahid Balwa and Vinod Goenka...
indore Mahavidyalaya Vs. National Council for Teachers Education
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
1. The present appeal is directed against an order of the learned Single Judge dated 25.05.2011. The writ petitioner had challenged an order of the Appellate Committee of the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), which had upheld the recommendation of the Western Regional Committee, for withdrawal of recognition of the petitioner institute. 2. Learned Single Judge noticed that the genesis of the litigation was from a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), i.e. W.P. 6146/2008 before the Jabalpur Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court where the controversy was with regard to alleged violation of provisions of law by the institutes/colleges granted recognition, and violation under the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993. That writ petition was disposed of. Subsequently, the petitioner was issued with some notice on 28.12.2009 under Section 17 of the NCTE Act, which was impugned before the same High Court in W.P. 1052/2010. A Bench of the High Court disposed of that petiti...
Suresh Chand Sharma Vs. the State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
1. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. CRL.A. No. 385/2011 2. By the judgment dated 14.12.2010 and the order on sentence dated 15.12.2010 the Appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302/307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment as under:- "(i) to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of ` 3,000/- in default simple imprisonment for six months under Section 302 IPC. (ii) to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of ` 3,000/- in default simple imprisonment for six months under section 307 IPC. (iii) to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of ` 3,000/- in default simple imprisonment for six months under Section 27 Arms Act, 1959." Feeling aggrieved, the Appellant has filed the present criminal Appeal. 3. The prosecution case is that Suresh Chand Sharma (the Appellant) was working as a Machine Operato...
Sagar @ Gyanender Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
1. This judgment would dispose of an appeal directed against the judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 19.04.2010 in SC No.64/2008. By the impugned judgment, the Trial Court convicted the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 302 IPC. The appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default of which he was to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. 2. The prosecution's case is that at about 8.40 PM on 23.12.2007, a PCR Constable- PW-9- received information regarding a stabbing incident at Gali No.8, Kanti Nagar, which was duly recorded in the form Ex.PW-9/A. The police reached the spot and gathered that the injured has been taken to the G.T.B. Hospital. The injured (Ashok Kumar "the deceased") was declared as dead in the MLC prepared at 9:40 PM. That document was exhibited in the trial as Ex.PW-25/D. The sole eye witness was deceased's uncle; his statement was recorded at 11:40 PM (Ex.PW- 2/A); ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »